Chapter 15 - MARGARET’S CHILD TRIAL
Margaret’s child-restraint case went first.
Lily did not testify live.
The court admitted portions of her forensic interview under applicable protections.
Security video showed Margaret tying the chair.
There was no ambiguity.
Her lawyer argued:
The ribbon was symbolic.
Lily could have slipped free.
The child repeatedly disrupted a private gathering.
Margaret intended brief separation.
Then the prosecutor showed Lily trying the door.
Margaret tightening the knot.
Food visible inside.
Her statement afterward about adulterers.
The jury convicted her of unlawful restraint/endangerment involving a child and a related misdemeanor cruelty offense.
She was acquitted of a more severe kidnapping-style count.
Correct.
She did not move Lily to another location.
She restrained and excluded her.
At sentencing, Margaret said:
“I never intended physical harm.”
The judge replied:
“You intended humiliation and physical confinement. A child’s fear does not become harmless because an adult calls it discipline.”
She received a short custodial term followed by probation, family-violence intervention, and no contact with Lily absent future court or therapeutic approval.
Not decades.
May you like
Not spectacle.
A meaningful sentence.
