Chapter 12 - Carla Saw the Second Attack
Carla Jenkins wore blue scrubs under blazer because she came directly from shift.
She testified simply.
She heard voices.
Returned trauma bay.
Saw Luke holding a stainless steel warming pot.
Saw him raise it toward me.
Saw steam.
Saw me say no.
Then she moved.
“Why?”
“I believed patient was in immediate danger.”
“Did water strike Caroline?”
“Yes. Some hit forearm and bedding. Most hit floor because I pushed him.”
“Did Luke fall?”
“Yes.”
“Did you?”
“Almost.”
Then he stood and said accident.
She heard.
Then threat:
“I’ll finish you.”
She heard.
Defense cross:
“Were you angry?”
“Yes.”
“You called him monster.”
Dr Warren did, not Carla? Prompt doctor says get monster away. Carla maybe no.
“You physically attacked him.”
“I intervened.”
“You could have caused spill.”
“Yes.”
“So his claim spill accidental in hospital has some truth.”
“The spill pattern changed because I hit him. He still raised hot water toward patient first.”
Clear.
Then:
“Could he have been bringing warm water for patient?”
Carla stared.
“It was steaming.”
Then:
“Did you measure temperature?”
“No.”
Hospital facilities later measured dispenser output around 185°F? Too detailed actionable. Could say dangerously hot. Fine.
Then Dr. Warren.
She explained burns.
Home pattern.
Hospital injury.
Pregnancy.
Old records.
The phrase all previous babies healthy boys had become social-media rumor? Trial closed public. She clarified.
“Three prior losses had genetic testing documenting male fetuses without the common chromosomal abnormalities assessed.”
“Does that prove pregnancies would have continued?”
“No.”
“Does it prove Caroline can conceive male fetuses?”
“Yes.”
Then toxicology.
She was not toxicologist.
She observed unexplained lab patterns.
Then toxicologist Dr. Priya Shah.
Current blood contained compound.
Jar contaminated.
Luke-purchased tablets residue matched.
Prior pregnancy 4 stored sample same compound.
Could pregnancy 4 loss be caused?
She said exposure could cause severe pregnancy complications and timing/concentration were consistent with contributing materially, but medicine could not prove sole cause.
Prosecution did not need sole cause if substantial.
Defense expert disagreed on causation.
Said sample storage/medical factors.
Battle.
Then purchase records.
Then pill grinder.
Then Luke’s notes.
Then financial accountant.
Child trust trigger.
Transfers.
Motive.
Defense:
Caroline benefited from properties.
Some.
Marital wealth.
Luke intended repayment.
Financial wrongdoing maybe fiduciary dispute, not reason to poison.
Then voice memo:
Let next one stick.
Jurors heard.
I watched Luke.
He did not look at me.
Then Eric.
He testified.
Defense attacked cooperation.
He admitted tax mislabeling.
He admitted friendship.
“Do you hate Luke?”
“No.”
“Want him convicted?”
“I want to tell truth.”
Then:
“Did Luke ever tell you explicitly, ‘I poisoned Caroline’?”
“No.”
Good.
Then Mason.
The trash bag.
Luke called.
Throw pregnancy stuff.
Mason said he believed cleanup.
Did Luke say destroy evidence?
“No.”
Did he say baby probably won’t make?
“Yes.”
At 9:12 before doctors said.
Then defense:
“Your brother was panicking.”
“Yes.”
“Could he simply assume severe burns endangered baby?”
“Yes.”
Possible.
Then Rebecca.
The judge carefully limited.
She testified only to blocked communication and trust trigger knowledge, not prosecutorial role.
Defense suggested family feud.
“Did you dislike Luke?”
“Yes.”
“Since when?”
“After he cut my sister off.”
“Before alleged poisoning discovered.”
“Yes.”
Bias.
True.
Then my turn.
I took oath.
Looked at Luke.
He looked back.
May you like
For years, eye contact changed my answers.
Not now.
