Chapter 21 - Camilla’s Case
Prosecutors evaluated confinement charges.
The evidence showed repeated locking of a child inside a dog crate for extended periods.
No serious physical injury.
Still significant.
Camilla eventually entered a plea to a child-endangerment offense involving inappropriate confinement.
She received probation with strict conditions rather than prison.
Why?
No prior record.
No serious bodily injury.
Cooperation.
Treatment.
The specific statutory framework and negotiated factors.
She was ordered to complete parenting intervention and individual therapy.
No unsupervised contact with Pippa during the protective period.
Restitution for therapy costs not covered by insurance.
Some relatives thought probation too light.
May you like
Others thought criminal court unnecessary.
Neither opinion changed the legal record.
