Chapter 14 - Vanessa Explains the Cake
Vanessa began by saying she loved Ruby.
I believed that in some distorted way.
She showed photographs.
Disney trip.
Christmas.
Ruby asleep on shoulder.
The prosecutor did not object to humanize.
Then:
“Did you intend to permanently injure?”
“No.”
“What happened?”
“She ate cake I had saved after my friend’s engagement dinner.”
Why important?
“It was last piece from celebration.”
Then:
“I came in stressed. I called her thief. Wrong.”
Then:
“She laughed?”
Ruby had not.
Video.
Vanessa corrected.
“She looked like she wasn’t taking me seriously.”
Then:
“I grabbed hair to move her away.”
Defense:
“Move?”
“Yes.”
“Did you intend head hit table?”
“No.”
“Did you push?”
“I pulled and she stumbled.”
Video showed forward force.
Then prior arm.
“She went through purse.”
Purple marker.
“I grabbed too hard.”
Hair brush.
“She was squirming.”
Threat:
“Figure of speech.”
Then:
“Did you mean kill?”
“Of course not.”
“Did you think Ruby believed?”
“No.”
Then parents.
“Did they enable?”
Vanessa bristled.
“They tried stop me.”
Some truth.
Then:
“Did you ask them lie?”
“Sometimes we agreed not make Megan overreact.”
There.
Then current hospital bottle.
“I was furious.”
Then:
“Do you regret?”
“Yes.”
She looked at me.
“Megan, I’m sorry.”
The judge:
“Address counsel.”
Then prosecutor cross.
“Ms. Walker, when Ruby ate cake, what crime had six-year-old committed?”
“None.”
“Did grandmother give permission?”
Vanessa:
“I didn't know.”
“Video shows mother told you.”
After.
Then:
“You called thief.”
“Yes.”
“You grabbed hair.”
“Yes.”
“You drove face forward.”
“I didn't mean table.”
Then frame by frame.
Her hand.
Ruby’s feet.
Not stumbling backward.
Forward.
Then:
“Did you release before impact?”
“No.”
Then:
“After child unconscious, what was first thing you said?”
“She fell.”
Not:
Help.
Then:
“Did you call ambulance?”
“No.”
“Did you touch child?”
“No.”
“Why?”
“I panicked.”
Then prior.
Arm.
Threat.
Mom’s warning.
“Did you know Megan would stop visits if truth?”
“Yes.”
“Did that influence telling Ruby grandma would get sick?”
Vanessa paused.
“I wanted her stop tattling.”
There.
“Why?”
“Because everything became huge.”
Then:
“Do you understand threat made child fear grandmother dying?”
“Now.”
Then deleted clip.
Mug shatter.
“Did you say give something to cry?”
“Yes.”
Then texts:
Stop grabbing where it shows.
Vanessa:
“My mother said.”
“Did you object?”
“No.”
Then:
“Did you ever tell Megan?”
“No.”
Then:
“Did you want hurt Ruby?”
“Not like this.”
The prosecutor:
“That’s not same as no.”
Defense object.
Sustained.
Then one final question:
“When you entered hospital and saw Ruby’s eye bandaged, did you apologize?”
Vanessa stopped.
“No.”
“What did you do?”
“I told Megan she fell.”
Then:
“Why?”
“I was scared.”
The prosecutor sat.
Fear again.
Everyone feared consequences.
Ruby carried injury.
Then closing arguments.
Defense:
A terrible impulsive act, not calculated attempt to blind child. Prior incidents lower level. Parents’ concealment proves dysfunctional family, but Vanessa did not intend serious injury.
Prosecution:
Intent to cause exact eye injury not required for serious assault. She intentionally grabbed child by hair and drove her into hard table after earlier threats and physical aggression. Afterward she lied.
May you like
The jury deliberated nine hours.
Then returned.
