Chapter 12 - The Affidavit
The affidavit was created before Nora was born.
Title:
Projected Post Assignment Financial Statement.
Brendan Morrison.
Assets:
Morrison Vale shares.
Retirement.
Real estate.
Carter Legacy Settlement controlled interests.
Estimated:
$118 million.
Wrong.
But he listed as his.
Then note:
Enhanced capacity for equal physical custody residence, childcare, private schooling.
He had planned a custody presentation around assets not his.
Again, wealth itself not determines custody.
But he thought.
Then an email to family lawyer draft, never sent:
Upon completion of Carter assignment, I anticipate being in stronger position to seek primary custody if Cassidy remains unstable.
Unstable?
What evidence?
Diane had started narrative.
Pregnant.
Emotional.
Limited income.
“Erratic behavior.”
One example:
Cassidy refused family dinner papers.
Another:
She kept her finances secret.
Then my disguised? no.
This was before water.
They were building.
My attorney used in family court only where relevant to credibility.
We did not ask terminate Brendan rights.
The judge extended supervised visitation due pending fraud and coercive conduct, with review after trial.
Brendan attended consistently.
He never spoke badly about me during visits according reports.
That was good.
Humans can behave differently in roles.
Then Nora smiled at him for first time at four months.
Supervisor wrote.
I cried.
Why?
Because my daughter loved faces indiscriminately.
She did not know court.
Good.
Then criminal trial.
Brendan and Diane tried separately? Could be joint with separate defenses. Court severed Diane's battery but fraud conspiracy joint? Let's say joint fraud trial with separate counsel, creating blame tension.
Jury selection.
No cameras.
I would testify.
Not as company owner only.
As signature holder.
As dinner victim.
As ex wife.
Defense would attack secrecy.
I prepared.
Prosecutor warned:
“They’ll say you concealed wealth to manipulate marriage and divorce.”
“I know.”
“Do not argue.”
“I know.”
Then:
“They’ll say you intended corporate revenge.”
“Independent board.”
“Explain.”
Good.
Trial opening.
Prosecution:
“This is not a case about who morally deserved Morrison Vale. It is about whether defendants knowingly used a false signature and electronic submission to obtain authority they did not have.”
Good.
Defense Brendan:
“Cassidy Carter routinely allowed Brendan access to family affairs during marriage. This was a disputed continuation of permissions in a complicated divorce.”
No.
Defense Diane:
“Diane relied on son.”
They turned.
Then evidence.
Trust terms.
Signature files.
Login.
Messages.
Schedule D.
Dinner.
Video from Diane’s own home security.
She had security cameras in dining? Maybe yes, motion video no audio? Could capture water and shove. Great. She had turned interior cameras off? Perhaps one foyer camera captured partial. Witnesses enough.
My phone? I had not recorded initial. Prompt didn't say phone recording before. Could use one guest cell video. Jessica's phone? We have witnesses. Fine.
Then me.
I testified that I never authorized protector transfer.
Never agreed verbally.
Never signed.
Never gave Brendan ongoing power.
Then cross.
“Did you tell husband you controlled Northcross?”
“No, not expressly.”
“Why?”
“Trust privacy and because he did not ask.”
“Did you know he believed you had modest assets?”
“I knew he underestimated.”
“Did you correct?”
“Sometimes generally, not valuation.”
“So you let him believe.”
“I did not owe him a falsehood. He had independent counsel and disclosures.”
Then:
“You enjoyed knowing something he didn’t.”
I paused.
“Sometimes.”
Honest.
“Did that make you feel superior?”
“Sometimes.”
Court quiet.
Then:
“Did you use ownership to get him fired?”
“No.”
“Company fired after Protocol Seven you triggered.”
“I triggered transfer freeze and security review. Independent directors terminated him.”
“But you control majority shareholder.”
“Yes.”
“Could board defy?”
“Yes.”
Legally.
Then water.
“You came to Diane’s home knowing papers.”
“I knew a packet existed, not contents.”
“You could leave.”
“Yes.”
“After water?”
“Yes.”
“Instead you called company legal officer.”
“Because I suspected corporate implications and needed security.”
Then:
“Did you know transfer alert before call?”
“No. Arthur confirmed during call.”
Good.
Then defense attempted suggest I staged? Impossible.
Then Diane’s lawyer:
“Mrs. Morrison believed you had agreed to give Brendan authority.”
“Why would she hide Schedule D?”
Objection? Argument. I answered only questions.
Then:
“Did you ever tell Diane your trust would support Brendan?”
“No.”
“Did you tell her he would never receive?”
“I had no reason.”
Then:
“You deliberately presented yourself as financially limited.”
“I lived within my own choices.”
“Did you ever ask Morrison family for money?”
“No.”
“Did Brendan pay mortgage?”
Joint.
“We both contributed.”
Then:
“During pregnancy after separation, did he offer support?”
“Yes.”
“Did you refuse some?”
“Yes because unnecessary.”
So charity narrative false.
Then prosecution redirect:
“Did any of those financial choices authorize signature?”
“No.”
Core.
I stepped down.
Then Brendan’s laptop.
Messages.
His remote login.
No escape.
Then Jessica testified.
She looked at me once.
No smile.
She admitted.
Defense attacked plea.
She accepted responsibility.
Then Diane’s Saturday video.
Use clean one.
That line.
Then Brendan made decision.
He took stand.
May you like
And for the first time under oath, my ex husband admitted he knew my signature had been placed on the transfer document before I saw it.
Continue to the next part: Brendan admitted knowing about the copied signature, but claimed he believed he was only forcing me to honor a promise I had made during our marriage.
