Chapter 7 - TREVOR’S EXPLANATION
Trevor asked for an interview through attorneys.
Not with me.
With police.
His lawyer later provided Rebecca a summary of what could be shared.
Trevor admitted:
He knew Judith added something to the twins’ night bottles.
He claimed he believed it was a pediatrician-approved supplement.
Did he ask the pediatrician?
No.
Did he see the container?
“Yes.”
Did it have a pharmacy label?
He claimed he could not remember.
Did he tell Rachel?
No.
Why?
“Judith and Rachel fought about everything.”
A terrible answer.
Then the text:
Mom, stop bringing your little bottle here. Rachel almost saw.
Why hide a legitimate supplement?
Trevor said:
“Because Rachel would overreact.”
Another terrible answer.
Why say “too much” the night the twins died?
Trevor claimed he saw Judith adding more than usual.
More what?
He refused to identify until laboratory confirmation because his attorney feared self-incrimination through speculation.
That sounded legal.
Not innocent.
Why not stop the feeding?
Trevor said he did.
Did the babies receive those bottles?
He claimed he did not know.
Emma said Grandma had a bottle.
Trevor said he took one from her.
Then:
What was rinsed bottle in garage?
He admitted moving it.
Why?
“Panic.”
From what?
“When I found the boys, I thought people would blame Mom.”
Why would they blame Judith if he believed she used harmless supplement?
Silence.
Then:
He had begun doubting it was harmless after Noah’s earlier lethargy.
There.
He knew enough.
Not everything.
Why wash the bottle?
He said Judith did.
Why put it in his garage bag?
“She handed it to me.”
Why keep it?
“I couldn’t throw it away.”
Cowardice and conscience in the same bag.
Then finances.
Detective Ellis asked:
“Was your wife refusing a corporate vote?”
Trevor’s attorney objected to relevance.
Prosecutors were already looking.
Trevor eventually answered.
“Yes.”
“Did your mother want Rachel declared temporarily unable to vote after the twins died?”
“No.”
“Did you sign a child-care memorandum?”
“Yes.”
“Why?”
“I thought Rachel needed rest.”
“Did she ask?”
“No.”
“Did the memorandum place Emma with Judith?”
“Temporarily.”
“Did that affect Rachel’s voting rights?”
“No.”
Technically.
But an incapacity petition could.
Was one drafted?
Trevor said:
“Not by me.”
Careful.
Then Rebecca found it.
Draft petition.
Temporary Protective Administration for Rachel Caldwell Foster.
Grounds:
Acute complicated grief.
Possible responsibility for infant-care errors.
Inability to participate rationally in major corporate decisions.
Proposed temporary financial representative:
Trevor.
Not core trust trustee.
But voting representative substitute.
Could a court grant that casually?
No.
Would evidence of suspected infant negligence make it more plausible to try?
Yes.
Did Trevor know about draft?
Metadata showed it in his email.
Unread?
Maybe.
Then a message from Judith:
If toxicology points at Rachel, we solve two problems at once.
Trevor:
Do not say that again.
Judith:
You know I’m right.
He did not agree.
He did not expose her either.
The words sat between criminal investigation and family betrayal.
Then the medical examiner called.
Final toxicology conference scheduled for the next day.
Rebecca asked:
“Do you want me there?”
“Yes.”
“What are you afraid of?”
I looked at the photographs of Noah and Caleb on Caroline’s mantel.
May you like
“That I’ll finally know.”
Sometimes uncertainty is the last place hope hides.
