Chapter 13 - The Trial Grant Chose
Grant rejected the final plea offer.
He went to trial.
By then Ivy was almost one.
The case focused on financial offenses.
Not adultery.
Not abandonment.
Not whether he was a bad husband.
The prosecution had to prove specific fraud.
They began with vendor payments.
Legitimate Wynn work.
Then inflated invoices.
Duplicate invoices.
Related entities.
Undisclosed conflicts.
Then GCE.
Money returning to Grant.
Then hardware tokens.
Julia Denton testified.
“I gave Grant my token to return to IT.”
Then IT logs.
Unauthorized use.
Then my token.
Office access.
Attempted River North approval.
Then forged signatures.
Director Malcolm Reyes.
He testified:
“I did not sign this.”
Another director.
Same.
Dr. Foster.
“I did not write this letter.”
Then medical incapacity timeline.
Grant’s own notes.
Then Celeste.
The courtroom packed for her.
She wore navy, not red.
She admitted affair.
Fraud.
Lies.
Her plan to leave Grant in Lisbon.
Defense enjoyed that.
“You lied to Grant?”
“Yes.”
“You stole from him?”
“Yes.”
“You assaulted Mara?”
“Yes.”
“You want a lower sentence?”
“Yes.”
“So why believe you?”
Celeste looked at jury.
“Don’t believe me because I’m trustworthy.”
Then:
“Believe his voice.”
Recordings played.
Grant:
Use Mara’s tax credit signature.
Grant:
Not from a hospital bed with a newborn.
Grant:
Better if baby comes early.
Then defense argued context.
He was joking.
Frustrated.
Talking hypothetically.
Some jurors might agree.
Then Laurent Duvall testified remotely through proper arrangements.
He believed Grant had board authority.
He requested certification.
Never received valid.
No River North money transferred.
No foreign conspiracy.
Then me.
I testified only to things I knew.
Ownership.
My signature.
My token.
My lack of authorization.
Then defense asked:
“You had been investigating your husband secretly for six months.”
“Yes.”
“You wanted evidence.”
“I wanted facts.”
“You allowed him to continue working.”
“The board special committee controlled employment decisions.”
“You pressed a button in the garage that restricted accounts.”
“I authenticated an already approved preservation protocol.”
“You wanted to destroy him.”
“No.”
“Really?”
I looked at Grant.
He looked older.
Then:
“I wanted him to stop using my company.”
“Were you angry?”
“Yes.”
“Still?”
“Yes.”
Honesty.
Then:
“You filed divorce.”
“Yes.”
“You took his daughter.”
Objection.
Sustained.
Family court orders.
No inflammatory shorthand.
Then the defense asked:
“Did Grant ever tell you he planned to hurt you?”
“No.”
“Did he order Celeste to assault you?”
“Not that I know.”
“Did he cause your labor?”
“No.”
Good.
The trial was not a revenge story.
Then Grant testified.
He admitted some vendor impropriety.
Claimed he intended to repay.
Claimed River North restructuring could have saved everything.
He admitted copying signatures?
He said Celeste did.
Then prosecutors played:
Reyes signature looks clean.
Use Mara’s tax credit version.
Grant closed eyes.
Then he changed.
“I knew.”
There.
The jury heard.
Then prosecutor asked:
“Mr. Ellison, did you believe your wife would forgive the fraud if your plan made money?”
Grant whispered:
“Yes.”
“Why?”
“Because she loved me.”
Silence.
Then:
“Did loving you give you authority?”
Grant looked toward me.
May you like
“No.”
That answer may have convicted him more clearly than any expert.
