Chapter 14 - Diane’s defense
Diane did not deny strict discipline.
She denied abuse.
Her attorney framed the basement as:
“A brief safe space away from household hazards.”
The padlock?
“Used only when room was empty.”
Lily’s statement?
Two-year-old language unreliable.
Scratch marks?
Could predate.
Toddler bowl?
Laundry snacks.
Neighbor video?
Carrying a resistant toddler is not abuse.
All individually arguable.
Then the dinner.
Diane claimed Lily threw food repeatedly.
She placed her on floor for “calm-down.”
Why prevent guests from feeding her?
“Because she had refused dinner and was manipulating adults for treats.”
Steak on marble?
“She reached for dropped food before anyone could stop her.”
But cousin Melissa Carter testified:
“Diane pushed the meat toward Lily with her shoe.”
Why?
“I don’t know.”
Then clonidine.
Diane claimed Ryan asked for help because Lily would not sleep.
She believed he had pediatric approval.
Any message from pediatrician?
No.
Any prescription?
No.
Then Noah.
Could prosecutors use the old child-welfare case?
Not freely to prove:
She did it before, so she did it again.
Courts restrict propensity evidence.
But parts could become relevant to:
Knowledge.
Intent.
Notice that confinement practices had previously been deemed unsafe.
May you like
The judge would decide admissibility.
No shortcut.
