Chapter 12 - The Child Safety Case
Marcelline’s criminal case took time.
The staircase video was strong.
Prior incidents less so.
No cameras in bedrooms.
No video near pool showing actual push clearly.
Staff remembered tension.
One nanny recalled Elsa crying after a visit.
No proof of cause.
The prosecutor did not charge five invented assaults.
Good.
The staircase incident supported child-endangerment and assault-related charges.
Marcelline’s lawyer argued:
She intended to reposition Elsa away from the stairs, not toward them.
Video contradicted enough of that to create risk.
But Elsa had not actually fallen because I caught her.
No serious injury.
Negotiations continued.
Meanwhile child-protection authorities assessed whether Elsa could safely have contact with Marcelline.
I wanted:
Never.
Dr. Shaw said:
“Not your unilateral decision if there are court orders or family arrangements later.”
There were no formal aunt visitation rights automatically.
Marcelline did not have custody.
So practically I could decline informal contact.
Still, professionals recommended:
No contact during investigation.
Later, if Elsa wanted, therapeutic contact could be considered.
I agreed.
Elsa said:
“No.”
That mattered.
No one forced reconciliation.
Marcelline sent three letters through counsel.
Elsa declined.
We stored them.
At seven, a child does not owe an aunt access because biology exists.
May you like
Especially after fear.
────────────────────
