Chapter 11 - THE SHOVE CASE
My mother-in-law pleaded not guilty.
Her right.
The hallway camera showed:
me backing toward the bridal bathroom.
Her hands contacting my upper arms.
A forceful shove.
My impact with wall.
Fall.
Water on marble afterward.
No audio for the first seconds.
A guest phone recorded part of the argument later.
Her defense:
She was trying to move me out of the doorway because I was blocking wedding staff.
She did not intend me to fall.
Possible distinction.
Intent to push versus intent to injure.
The prosecutor charged:
assault.
Reckless endangerment involving a visibly pregnant person.
No attempted murder.
Good.
The wedding coordinator testified:
“She was angry that Carys intended to leave.”
Did mother-in-law know I was contracting?
“Yes.”
Did she know my water had broken before the shove?
No.
Important.
My water broke after the fall.
So she did not shove a woman knowing membranes had ruptured.
She did shove a thirty-four-week pregnant woman who said she was contracting.
Still serious.
Then:
Did she interfere after water broke?
Yes.
She told me to change clothes.
Told me not to call.
Said the wedding came first.
That supported recklessness and motive.
My father’s slap video came in too.
Defense argued family chaos.
Fine.
He was not sanitized.
Then I testified.
“Did she cause your preterm delivery?”
The prosecutor asked carefully.
“My doctors could not say that.”
Good.
Trauma may contribute.
PPROM can happen spontaneously.
I would not turn timing into certainty.
“Did the fall injure the baby directly?”
“No evidence of direct injury.”
“Then why are we here?”
Objection.
Sustained.
Defense tried to frame:
No serious injury from shove.
I answered:
“My daughter was premature. I’m not claiming the shove caused that. I’m claiming she shoved me.”
Simple.
The jury convicted her of assault and reckless endangerment at the level supported by statute.
No higher count requiring intent to cause serious injury.
Sentence:
Short custodial component partly suspended due age and lack of criminal history.
Probation.
Anger-management treatment.
No contact with me for defined period.
No unsupervised contact with my daughter absent future court agreement.
She lost nothing corporate through criminal court except where conditions affected conduct.
Her consulting matter separate.
Good.
At sentencing, she said:
“I never wanted the baby harmed.”
I believed her.
Then she said:
“I believed Carys was using pregnancy to control the day.”
I stopped believing she understood.
The judge asked:
“Why would a woman whose water had broken need to manipulate a wedding?”
She had no answer.
Then:
“Your problem was not that you valued the wedding. Your problem was that you treated another person’s body as part of the event schedule.”
Exactly.
My father’s case resolved next.
Misdemeanor assault.
No jail.
Fine.
Community service.
Anger program.
He accepted.
He apologized to her in writing:
I should not have struck you after the immediate threat to my daughter had ended.
She never replied.
Fine.
His accountability did not require hers.
Then my husband attended his mother’s sentencing.
I did not resent him.
That surprised me.
She was his mother.
Loving her did not mean excusing her.
May you like
He was learning that distinction.
Maybe.
