Chapter 6 - “You Didn’t See Anything”
Nora’s recording was legal because she was part of call under applicable law.
She had started recording after police told her to preserve any attempted witness pressure.
Walter’s voice:
“Nora, this has gotten ridiculous.”
“I know.”
“You need to be careful what you say.”
“About what?”
“Eli was running around.”
Nora:
“No, he was standing where Derek put him.”
Pause.
Walter:
“You didn’t see the exact moment.”
“I saw him before.”
“That is not same.”
Then:
“You tell police Derek assigned him some kind of job, they’re going to make this sound intentional.”
Nora:
“He did assign him.”
Walter became sharper.
“You’re dating my son. Act like it.”
Then:
“Say you were on porch and didn’t see where boy was.”
Nora:
“But I did.”
Walter:
“You didn’t see anything useful.”
That line.
Then Nora:
“What about camera?”
Silence.
Walter:
“Camera wasn’t working.”
Nora:
“It was yesterday.”
Walter ended call.
That recording became obstruction/witness-influence evidence.
No threat of violence.
No bribe.
Still.
Then Derek.
His attorney changed position.
Initial:
Eli wandered.
Now video:
Derek assigned him.
New:
Derek believed Eli would remain outside path and only watch stationary reference point.
Could be negligence, not intent.
Yes.
No one claimed Derek meant to hit nephew.
Important.
He loved Eli in his way.
That did not make assignment safe.
Then mechanical reconstruction.
Police determined trailer’s rear corner swept laterally as Derek angled during reverse.
A five-year-old could not reliably judge path.
No need operational detail.
Derek had no adult spotter.
He had placed child too close.
The prior insurer rule existed precisely to prevent.
Then texts before accident.
Walter to Derek, two weeks earlier:
Remember trust rules. No kids near trailer. Elaine is already on me about camera checks.
Derek:
I know.
There.
Accident day, Derek apparently ignored because he was impatient and wanted boat launched before friends arrived.
Nora’s earlier video:
“plate duty.”
No ambiguity.
Then I asked Eli something carefully with therapist/social worker advice.
“Did Uncle Derek ever have you help trailer before?”
“Yes.”
My heart sank.
“How many?”
He counted.
“Two?”
“What did you do?”
“Hold key.”
“Stand where?”
“Far.”
No need interrogate.
We stopped.
Police did child forensic interview professionally.
I did not make him repeat for family.
Then Derek’s own statement finally.
Through counsel:
“I told Eli to stand at side and watch bracket. I believed he was outside sweep area. I should not have used him as spotter.”
Then:
“I knew prior rule prohibited kids.”
There.
“Why ignore?”
“I thought it was overcautious.”
That sentence.
Adults treating safety rule as suggestion.
Then:
“Did Walter know?”
Derek:
“He saw Eli.”
“Did he say?”
“He yelled something like ‘keep him clear.’”
Footage gesture.
Derek claimed he thought clear.
Walter claimed he told Derek to move Eli.
No audio.
Could not prove exact.
But Walter did not physically remove child or stop vehicle.
His criminal exposure centered afterward deletion and witness pressure, not necessarily accident.
Then June.
She had no part in assignment.
Her cruelty after accident was not crime by itself.
She did move bent plate parts.
Police asked why.
“To save them for repair.”
Was scene preservation instruction given?
At that point no officer had told.
So no evidence tampering charge.
Good.
But she had said:
“Megan should pay.”
She later apologized? Not yet.
Then civil insurer.
Derek’s auto policy insurer opened claim.
Trust property insurer also because premises/trailer maybe.
No fight yet.
Then CPS.
They closed concern regarding me after confirming:
I had left Eli with adult uncle after uncle offered supervision.
I called 911 immediately.
Followed care.
Removed him from environment.
No case against my custody.
They did make safety findings/referral regarding Derek and Walter.
That mattered because Dad had begun telling relatives:
“Megan’s going to get Eli taken because she called police.”
False.
I sent family one message:
Eli is safe with me. Stop repeating claims about custody. I will not discuss active investigation.
Then muted.
Then Grandpa Walter emailed:
If you continue this, don’t expect to inherit lake house.
I forwarded Julia.
She replied with four words:
He cannot do that.
Then:
And he knows it.
May you like
That last part mattered.
Because Walter had signed trust documents too.
