Chapter 13 - FENELLA’S FIRST DEFENSE
Fenella denied “imprisonment.”
She said:
Clotilde entered the shed during an argument.
Fenella locked the door because I was “throwing things.”
False.
No broken objects in house.
No witness.
Then:
She intended to unlock me after I calmed down.
The notebook contradicted.
Five-day correction.
Then:
The water and blanket were compassionate.
That statement accidentally admitted preparation.
Her lawyer revised:
Fenella had stocked emergency supplies earlier for storm season.
Except:
Blanket came from hall closet that morning.
Lantern from basement.
Bucket purchase receipt two days before.
Water jug filled the night before.
Then phone.
Fenella claimed I had asked her to message Auberon because I did not want to speak.
No message from me requesting that.
No witness.
Why move my car?
“Privacy.”
Why write a false statement?
“To help Clotilde explain an embarrassing breakdown.”
Why search fasting safety before the confinement?
Fenella said:
“I was worried she was skipping meals during pregnancy.”
My medical records showed no such concern.
Then the three conditions.
She called them:
“Family boundaries.”
The prosecutor called them:
May you like
“Demands imposed under confinement.”
The difference would matter at trial.
