Chapter 16 - Richard Goes To Trial
Dad rejected final plea offering forty eight months recommended range.
He believed jury would understand family.
They did understand family.
Not how he hoped.
Prosecution began with deed.
Simple.
Arden Voss.
Then payment records.
Then fake authorization.
Then booking page.
Then messages.
“Arden doesn’t know.”
“She’ll say no.”
“Don’t post.”
“Looks real enough.”
Then renters.
Melissa:
“Richard told me he was owner.”
Paul:
“Richard told me his daughter held title for tax purposes but he controlled.”
Jennifer:
“He signed settlement as owner after I broke my wrist.”
Then Aunt Liora.
“Did you believe Arden approved?”
“Yes.”
“Why?”
“Richard told us.”
“Did you later learn?”
“Yes.”
“Did you see message saying Arden didn’t know Memorial Day?”
“Yes.”
“Why still go?”
Liora swallowed.
“Because I wanted to.”
Good witness because honest.
Then Keaton.
Dad’s lawyer attacked.
“You’re testifying for lower sentence.”
“Yes.”
“You designed site.”
“Yes.”
“You forged signature.”
“Yes.”
“You proposed outsiders.”
“Yes.”
“So Richard followed you?”
Keaton:
“No. He approved, collected, gave me instructions, and told guests he controlled.”
Then Elaine.
Spousal? She could testify due waiver/plea and marital privilege nuances. She testified to acts, communications maybe privilege limits. Let's not dive. She confirmed operations.
Then me.
Again.
Dad stared.
I focused prosecutor.
Then defense.
Their central argument:
Richard genuinely believed he had broad authority because Arden had repeatedly expressed desire for family to enjoy property, accepted improvements, and never objected until discovery.
But how could she object unknown?
They emphasized some LLC money paid cleaning/repairs benefiting house.
True.
They argued signature form was Keaton’s idea and Richard did not understand legal significance.
Text “Looks real enough” hurt.
Then Dad took stand.
Risky.
He insisted:
“I never thought of it as stealing.”
Prosecutor:
“That is not charge. Did you obtain payments through representations you were authorized?”
“I believed I was.”
“Why hide from Arden?”
“She overreacts.”
“If authorized, why hide?”
Silence.
“Why use her signature?”
“Guests wanted proof.”
“Why not ask Arden for proof?”
“She would refuse.”
There.
Then:
“You knew she would refuse.”
“Yes.”
“Yet continued representing she approved.”
Dad realized.
Too late.
Then closing.
Jury deliberated one day and part next.
Guilty on conspiracy.
Guilty on six representative wire fraud counts.
Not guilty on one count where payment evidence/representation unclear.
Important.
No total sweep.
Then sentencing months later.
Loss calculation based actual net/benefits and victims, not gross only.
Restitution would be joint and several for certain amounts with credits for payments/forfeiture.
Dad’s attorney highlighted age, no prior record, support history, family conflict.
Prosecutor highlighted duration, forged authority, injured guest concealment, breach of trust with daughter.
I submitted victim statement but did not recommend years.
I wrote:
He took my ability to decide who entered my home.
He used my work as explanation for why I would never notice.
Then:
I want restitution and final boundaries. I do not ask court to make him suffer for being bad father. Sentence should be for crimes proven.
Judge mentioned.
Dad received four years and six months federal imprisonment, three years supervised release, restitution.
Not life.
Not ten.
He was sixty eight.
Potentially served about three years ten months with credits.
He was taken into custody later surrender date.
No dramatic cuffs in court? Standard.
Before surrender, he wrote:
You won.
May you like
I did not respond.
This was not game.
