Chapter 23 - THE HEARING ABOUT CONTROL
The domestic protective-order hearing lasted three days.
Berenger’s lawyer began with my flaws.
The $112,000 transfer.
My reliance on Dad.
My refusal to sign financing without “even trying to understand the business rationale.”
That last one irritated me.
I had understood enough to want counsel.
Then my messages.
ME:
I’m done letting you decide what I eat.
ME:
If you touch my phone again I’m calling Dad.
ME:
Maybe Dad should remove you if you think being CEO makes you king.
That last message was two weeks before the board action.
Berenger’s lawyer loved it.
“Did you threaten his job?”
“I threatened to tell my father.”
“Did you?”
“No.”
“Why not?”
“I thought it would make the marriage worse.”
Then:
“Were you hoping the board would remove him?”
“After I learned what he used company resources for, yes.”
Honest.
Then Berenger testified.
He admitted:
Taking my card.
Disconnecting internet.
Withholding breakfast.
Removing the step board.
Adding soil.
Continuing after board removal.
Then he tried to frame it.
“I did not believe she was physically trapped.”
Photographs.
My buried legs.
He looked away.
Then:
“I believed she could leave if she truly wanted.”
The judge asked:
“Why remove the board?”
Berenger paused.
“To stop her leaving the conversation.”
There.
No need more.
Then:
“Why add dirt?”
“To make climbing inconvenient.”
There.
Inconvenient.
A pregnant woman.
Then:
“Why hunger?”
“I wanted her to take the financial issue seriously.”
The language of control kept becoming clearer because he insisted on explaining.
Then the judge asked:
“Did she owe you the signature?”
“No.”
“Did you behave as though she did?”
May you like
“Yes.”
There.
