Chapter 22 - THE CRIMINAL CASE THAT WAS SMALLER THAN THE FAMILY WANTED
My relatives wanted Celeste arrested for abusing Eva.
The prosecutor wanted statutes.
Video showed:
Taking the locket.
Throwing it.
Cruel words.
Removing photographs.
Attempting to take the locket again.
No strike against Eva.
No physical injury.
The locket suffered a bent hinge and scratched casing.
Property belonged beneficially to Eva under Mara’s estate distribution.
The most supportable criminal theory was misdemeanor criminal mischief or property damage, plus a narrow harassment-related count depending local law.
The offsite property created potential conversion/theft issues.
But many items had ambiguous household ownership and I had given vague simplification authority.
Prosecutors did not inflate.
Good.
Celeste accepted responsibility for the damaged locket and certain clearly identified Eva-owned items.
A diversion-type resolution was offered.
Restitution.
Counseling.
No unlawful contact with Eva.
No new offense.
No admission to stealing an entire estate.
She hesitated.
Then refused initially because the factual statement said:
Celeste intentionally interfered with a minor child’s possession of memorial property to discourage attachment to the child’s deceased mother.
She wanted:
During an emotionally charged family dispute.
The prosecutor declined.
Civil litigation continued.
My own assault diversion began.
Two adults arguing about wording.
May you like
A three-year-old trying to learn where her stuffed rabbit was.
Perspective.
