Chapter 17 - The Criminal Case Against Stellan
Would Stellan face charges?
Prosecutor reviewed.
He did not strike Benson.
He did not personally remove most meals.
But he authorized food-based discipline and knowingly continued placing Benson with Agatha after learning she removed food for non-food behavior.
Could support misdemeanor child endangerment.
The prosecutor charged one count.
No felony.
Stellan considered plea.
His attorney argued:
He set limits.
Told Agatha not to remove food when Benson was eating.
Did not know full extent.
True.
Prosecutor pointed to:
No more than missing one meal. Breakfast normal.
Authorization.
Then continued chart use after knowing.
Stellan pleaded to misdemeanor child endangerment/failure to protect.
No trial.
Why?
He said:
“I don’t want Benson someday reading that I fought to prove this was okay.”
That mattered.
Sentence:
Probation.
Parenting education.
Community service.
No unsupervised delegation of Benson to Agatha during probation.
No food deprivation as discipline.
No jail.
His professional job survived.
Employer knew.
No financial role issue.
No reason to destroy career.
Consequences proportional.
May you like
Then the divorce moved forward.
Separate.
