Chapter 5 - The Lawyer Who Warned Nathan
The $9,500 did not go to a lawyer.
It went to Diane.
Diane then paid $6,000 to family attorney Robert Ames.
The remaining $3,500 went toward her credit card.
That distinction mattered.
The bank records showed no direct $9,500 legal theft.
Just:
Nathan transferred marital money to his mother.
She spent part on a lawyer and part personally.
Why Robert Ames?
Subpoena later answered.
But before subpoena, Jasmine called his office because his name appeared in Diane’s family-group messages.
Ames could not disclose client communications.
He did confirm:
He represented Nathan on a consultation basis before current criminal case.
Conflict meant he would not represent him now due witness issues.
That was enough to make me sick.
Nathan had consulted a family lawyer before the strap.
Then discovery in divorce produced nonprivileged billing entries and, eventually, Nathan waived some privilege while trying to defend himself? Better privileged communications don't come out easily. Some emails may be produced if sent to Diane third party, destroying privilege. Good.
Diane had been copied on several emails.
That likely waived confidentiality for those communications depending jurisdiction.
One email from Nathan:
If Rachel becomes unstable late in pregnancy or after delivery, what do I need for temporary custody?
Ames:
“Unstable” is not a legal standard. Emergency orders require evidence that the child faces actual risk. Do not manufacture incidents, interfere with medical care, or create recordings designed to provoke conduct.
My hands shook reading it.
He had warned Nathan directly.
Nathan replied:
Understood. My mother may stay with us after birth.
Ames:
Your wife’s consent matters regarding household arrangements.
Diane then wrote from her own email:
What if Rachel leaves home during pregnancy?
Ames:
Leaving the marital residence does not by itself constitute abandonment of a child, especially where no child has yet been born. Do not rely on internet descriptions of “abandonment.”
Exactly what Jasmine told me.
They had been warned.
Then why still send message:
“Save proof she abandoned home”?
Because advice did not fit plan.
Another email:
Nathan:
Can prenatal anxiety be used to establish she needs supervised parenting?
Ames:
No. Pregnancy-related anxiety alone is not evidence of parental unfitness. If you have genuine concerns, seek appropriate medical/family evaluation.
Then nothing for three weeks.
Then cargo strap.
No email saying:
Strap her.
Good.
The lawyer did not plan.
He warned against manipulation.
That actually made Nathan look worse.
Then financial accounting.
Hayes Residential LLC.
Diane owned 60%.
Nathan owned 40%.
Nathan’s interest dated before marriage.
At marriage four years earlier:
His 40% interest valued around $105,000.
Current preliminary estimate:
$124,000.
Not huge growth.
The company had cash-flow problems:
Two renovation projects over budget.
One client withholding final payment.
Equipment loan.
Insurance increase.
Nathan transferred $44,000 of joint savings to Hayes Residential.
Company books called them:
Member Advances – N. Hayes.
Meaning loans/capital from Nathan.
But the money came from marital joint account.
No documented consent from me.
Some funds kept payroll afloat.
Not hidden criminal theft.
Potential marital dissipation/contribution claim.
Another $14,000 went to Diane personally:
$9,500 legal/misc.
$4,500 mortgage/credit card.
Diane had repaid zero.
Jasmine said:
“We’ll account.”
I wanted rage.
Accounting felt insulting.
But accounting was how property got untangled.
Then protective-order plenary hearing.
Video played.
Nathan’s lawyer argued:
Family superstition.
Seconds-long contact.
No fetal injury.
Nathan had not intended harm.
He returned keys when asked.
Jasmine:
Rachel clearly refused.
Nathan tightened anyway.
Diane recorded/encouraged.
Medical appointment was intentionally canceled in advance.
Keys withheld until Rachel threatened ambulance.
Nathan later messaged about abandonment.
Judge did not decide criminal guilt.
Civil standard.
Two-year protective order entered:
No physical/contact harassment.
No interference with healthcare.
No direct contact except court-approved family communication after baby born.
No residence access while Rachel had exclusive possession? Nathan had house currently. Actually Rachel left. Judge can grant exclusive possession to Rachel based hardship. She did not want return. So order maintained Nathan in house pending divorce? Better property case decides. We can keep no residence exclusion because Rachel chose alternative.
No approaching clinic/work.
Diane also prohibited from contact with Rachel and future child absent family-court order.
Unborn child named as protected expected child? Courts can protect after birth; maybe order automatically covers child once born if statutory? Let's say separate amendment after birth. For now Rachel only.
Then criminal investigation.
Nathan arrested on warrant after prosecutors reviewed video and medical evidence.
Not at work publicly.
He surrendered.
Charge:
Felony aggravated domestic battery based intentional force against known pregnant spouse under applicable state enhancement.
Misdemeanor coercive/harassing conduct? Let's avoid uncertain.
Also misdemeanor interference with medical services? Could be not.
Prosecutor filed:
Aggravated domestic battery.
Domestic battery.
Attempted obstruction of healthcare access? Maybe no.
Let's use only well-grounded generic:
felony aggravated domestic battery.
misdemeanor domestic battery merged/alternative.
misdemeanor unlawful interference with medical care under state statute? Not sure. Better call "separate misdemeanor charge related to impersonating Rachel to cancel medical care under state identity/telecommunications law" vague. Hmm.
Could simply mention prosecutors investigated clinic call but did not charge separately because statute fit uncertain. That's more grounded.
Diane charged:
Complicity in domestic battery.
Evidence tampering after attempting to delete video from her phone once police were called.
She surrendered too.
No jail pretrial after bond hearing except maybe overnight.
Conditions:
No Rachel contact.
No possession firearms.
No clinic interference.
No shared contact between co-defendants outside counsel? Court can order.
No contact future baby without family court.
Then Nathan’s attorney argued video deletion:
Diane deleted own copy before police told preserve evidence.
Could tampering still if she knew police were coming and deleted to impair evidence? Possibly.
Diane told officer:
“I deleted it.”
Cloud copy existed.
Charge stood.
Then Rachel's work.
My boss Lauren Mills approved medical leave flexibility.
I moved temporarily into a furnished apartment arranged through employer relocation benefit after shelter.
Address confidential from Nathan initially.
My sister helped.
I attended every prenatal visit.
Then one afternoon Nathan’s new criminal lawyer sent through Jasmine a proposed written agreement:
He would consent to no contact and reimburse $29,000 of joint savings if I agreed not to oppose supervised visits after birth.
I stared.
“Can he bargain money for baby access?”
Jasmine:
“He can propose settlement involving multiple issues, but parenting decisions must remain child-focused and court-approved. We are not trading money for custody.”
I declined.
Then another email from Robert Ames surfaced from before incident.
Nathan had asked:
Can I make Rachel attend family counseling with Mom before baby comes?
Ames:
You cannot compel an adult spouse into counseling outside court process, and your mother is not entitled to participate in prenatal decisions.
He had been told every answer.
No.
No.
No.
May you like
And he had treated each one as invitation to find another route.
Continue to the next chapter: Nathan’s own pre-incident lawyer had repeatedly warned him that pregnancy did not make Rachel unstable, leaving home was not abandonment, and Diane had no prenatal authority—yet Nathan ignored every warning and was now facing both criminal charges and a divorce accounting for the missing $58,000.
