 |
| Read the Johnson Bio at Amazon.com |
 |
| Available on Amazon |
“I object,” Bea said.
“Hold on a minute,” Goldblatt said. “Mr. Aguilar, you’re rebutting what testimony?”
“Carol Tracy is the initial interviewer. She’s going to rebut the allegation that she asked leading questions of this child in the initial interview. They’ve put that issue into question through not only Toffett but also Dr. DeSegonzac.”
Bea was boiling. That’s not true. Toffett said he didn’t have access to any information about Tracy. DeSegonzac, I don’t think mentioned Tracy at all. “Your Honor, we subpoenaed Carol Tracy. She never showed up for deposition. I came in with a motion to compel, which they vigorously opposed. I was denied access to her.”
“Was the motion denied?”
“Yes. And then we appealed that. We had no luck there, and now he wants to bring her in as a witness on the same basis?” Trial by ambush, Bea thought. Bill should have been allowed to depose Tracy and get her notes if she were going to testify.
“We’re talking about different things here,” Goldblatt said. “We’re talking about presumed rules and evidentiary rules and rules of procedure. Your purpose, Mr. Aguilar, is to rebut which testimony?” Goldblatt asked.
“The testimony toward the beginning, where he basically testified—”
Goldblatt stopped Aguilar in his tracks. “He testified, ‘The child did not spontaneously tell episodes, and this leads to leading questions which might contaminate the memory.’”
“Exactly,” Aguilar agreed.
“You’re going to rebut the statement that leading questions might contaminate the—” Goldblatt began asking.
“No,” Aguilar said. “I’m going to present Carol Tracy to testify as to what type of questions she asked.”
Bea feared whatever Tracy would say now would be or could be fabricated evidence, but there was no need to voice her objection. Goldblatt had everything under control.
“I don’t have it here as to what questions Carol Tracy asked. If she wants to rebut his expert opinion that leading questions might contaminate memory, fine, she can rebut that,” Goldblatt said. “But I have nothing in my notes that he commented on the questions Carol Tracy asked. He said he had no report of the questions asked, so I don’t know what there is to rebut here, unless you’re rebutting his expert testimony.”
Goldblatt continued to challenge Aguilar to give a valid reason to produce Carol Tracy as a rebuttal witness.
When Aguilar realized Goldblatt wouldn’t allow Tracy to testify as a rebuttal witness to what she said or did, he caved. He knew Tracy wouldn’t pass muster as an expert witness and would be incapable of rebutting what Toffett had said.
“All right. Then we’re through now. I’m going to start writing the report. There is no final argument here because I’m not sitting as a judge.”
“Proposed findings, Your Honor?” Bea asked, because traditionally, lawyers write proposed findings before a decision issues from the fact-finder. Here Retired Judge Goldblatt was a finder of facts who was sitting as a master, not as a judge. He’d write a report and then send it to a judge who might accept it as is or amend it at will.
Goldblatt, however, was willing to accept input from Bea and Aguilar before he wrote the facts he decided were true as a result of trial.
He specified what Bea and Aguilar were to write: “Proposed findings, limited to findings of fact. Not the theory of the case or anything of that sort. Just findings of fact. Rulings of law if you have any—only on issues that were either objected to or testimony that was admitted or rulings of law in terms of the evidence heard, not general rulings of law.” He looked up. “Is April 3rd, okay?”
Aguilar nodded.
Bea checked her calendar. “Terrific,” she said. She would have two weeks to write a list of those facts proved at trial that Bill would want Goldblatt to remember. She would also have to write a brief citing legal authorities backing her position pro or con Goldblatt’s rulings to allow evidence to come in or be kept out.
“Submit them to my home.”
The Overnight Paralegal
As they walked toward their podiums, Pitbull, the opposing counsel in attack mode, handed Bea some pleadings. More rules broken, Bea thought. All lawyers must give their opponent advance copies of documents to be heard in court. The rule did not appear to have been made with Pitbull in mind.
Because of her frustrated efforts to obtain a Concord police detail and Pitbull’s failure to confirm he’d allow a private detail to accompany her to the facility, Bea addressed the court.
McGill was more adversarial than a neutral judicial officer.
The measure of her frustration with McGill that day in Concord District Court was clear from what she said next: “You’re unwilling to enforce your own orders. It’s meaningless, Your Honor, to be in this court. It’s wasted time. I can’t afford it and my client can’t afford it.” She’d lost control. “From the tone of those letters, I really was scared stiff, Your Honor.”
“Can you tell me what you’re trying to get to in so many words?” McGill asked.
“I want you just to say to him, ‘Produce the documents the woman has requested. The court says she is entitled to them. Just give them to her.’”
McGill did not do as Bea requested.
“Your Honor, I’d also like to be heard on my other motion, to depose nonparty witnesses outside the presence of opposing counsel. It’s similar to two cases brought and allowed in the local federal district court when the demeanor of opposing counsel was particularly intimidating and it was believed employees of the defendant companies would hesitate to speak freely at deposition in his presence.”
Pitbull opposed and requested an award of attorney’s fees for having to oppose the motions.
Bea was at a disadvantage because she hadn’t seen Pitbull’s oppositions and he hadn’t even argued them. He simply requested payment of his fees. From the dates on the oppositions, she saw he’d prepared them sufficiently in advance of the hearing to have sent or even given them to her on the day he walked out of court because he didn’t want to wait until the court was ready to hear him.
McGill denied Bea’s motions. He wrote no reasons for doing so, he just circled the word “Allowed” stamped on Pitbull’s oppositions.
“My paralegal was at the facility,” Pitbull said, beginning to tell His Honor he had to pay his paralegal for traveling to, preparing the documents, waiting at the facility, and traveling from the facility. “All because Mrs. Archibald didn’t let me know until that morning she wasn’t going to appear.” That, of course, was untrue. Nevertheless, he sought $261.25 for his expenses for the paralegal.
“I’ll take it under advisement,” the judge said.
Several days later, Bea received the clerk’s notice of the action McGill took that day. The notice didn’t contain any reference to Pitbull’s motion for his expenses for the paralegal.
Hocus Pocus
Sometime during July, Bea spoke with Larry Kupersmith. “Hi, how’s our guy doing?” she said, embarrassed. “I suppose I should know, but I wear horse-blinders.” She hadn’t spoken to Larry since the trial. Their roles were different. They didn’t overlap.
Larry’s was supportive. Bea’s wasn’t. She was short on sympathy or empathy for anybody. It didn’t matter who. If she did muster the ability to say a few supportive words during a short meeting or phone conversation, inevitably she couldn’t sustain it. She could never have been a psychologist or a social worker or therapist or any of those professions requiring a shoulder be available for leaning.
Bea wanted to be kept informed as to Bill’s emotional condition, but without being responsible for it.
So she and Larry agreed to talk from time to time, always with Bill’s consent, in order to keep her up to date or alerted to something she ought to know.
Larry owned up. “Our guy is getting more anxious the longer he waits for the judge’s decision. I told him to sit down with you.”
“He told me. That’s why I called, to get a handle on what it was all about. Can’t do much. It’s a real bitch, isn’t it? Everyone expects justice to be swift... in an hour, with time out only for deodorant and battery commercials. It isn’t. It’s just a snail,” she said as she wound down. “Well, I suppose we should begin with what he said when the trial was over.”
“Well, catharsis was the topic after the trial. He said he felt good to say his piece and the judge seemed fair. He seemed interested in Bill’s feelings regarding custody. And Bill was pleased his friends had good things to say about him.”
“Yes, they did come through for him. One was a beautiful auburn-haired delicate little thing. I was hoping the judge would think she was his girlfriend... to emphasize that he was into adult women versus children.”
“Ugly, these cases.”
“Ugly, and the stain doesn’t ever wash out.” Bea stopped herself and then said, “Thank God, that’s your business, not mine... to deal with the stains, that is. Okay, what happened next?”
“He hopes if he gets custody, it’ll be harder for the DA to pursue the criminal case.”
“You’d think so. I’m doing my best to get the DA to think that way too, but there’s no predicting.”
“He seems to realize that. He has a new girlfriend, Kate, and the unpredictability is exactly what he’s worried about.”
“Is it real or for show?” Bea asked.
“Can’t answer that. He wonders why she’s interested in him. To be honest, at first, when he said that,
I didn’t know whether it was a self-image problem or whether he was referring to the prospect of prison being out there.”
“Well, prison is certainly still out there... and unfortunately, not very far away.”
“Yes, but the next time I saw him, he said he thought he was falling in love.”
“What was he like when he said that?”
“Teary-eyed. He said it was difficult, because by loving her, he has more to lose.”
“I wouldn’t want your job. It might be worse than mine. Next?” She asked, wanting to get every thread of information about Bill that Larry had.
“By this time, late in the Spring, the tension was building. He began yelling at the child during his visits, was a little upset, but he thought it was probably typical for a parent to yell occasionally.”
“That’s a truism.”
“It is. Appropriate sometimes, yelling. He saw his problem being his tendency to want to make each visit perfect.”
“Like that karate of his.”
“Well, that’s going well for him. He got his black belt and he videotaped that session for the child.’
“Sounds like a good idea.”
“he says it’s a good release for all his anger and frustration.”
“Directed to?”
“Denise, and to TV for playing on people’s emotions. Every other show is a child sex-abuse story, he says. They whip the public into hysteria. People are being framed and jailed without proof. He’s scared and he’s angry.”
“Okay, so I suppose the question becomes will he act on those feelings? That’s my concern.”
“I don’t think so. No. I told him he has permission to be scared and angry.”
Hocus pocus, Bea thought. “I suppose, so long as he has those outlets for it.”
“Well, that’s the point. His father and his girlfriend have been there for him. So has the karate. He’s teaching it now and he loves it. That’s his word. Every once in a while his imagination runs away. He’s afraid if the decision is in his favor, Denise will run away with the child. ‘If I get them cell phones, maybe I’ll be able to eavesdrop on them and hear her plans,’ he said.”
“That’s my fault,” Bea said. “I prepared him for that contingency. She could run. I ran and was gone with the kids for six or seven years. But about Denise, let me explain. Sometime in May, if I remember correctly, she wouldn’t allow him to have his weekly call with Chloe or his Saturday visit. Denise said they had plans to go away and were quote, ‘involved in something.’ That’s how she put it, evidently. She wouldn’t say what. She was deliberately evasive.
“After that, I spoke to Joe Aguilar. He intervened and suddenly Chloe became available for the visit. It was strange. So Bill’s fear had nothing to do with imagination. He was just trying to keep up with reality. What topped it off was what the child said during the visit.”
“What was that?” Larry asked.
“My understanding is she ran over to her mother and asked if she could tell Daddy they’re going away. Denise said ‘No.’ Bill asked Denise what it was all about, and she refused to answer. So I prepared a motion to arrest her and an affidavit for him to have ready just in case he learns she’s about to run.”
“Wow.”
“Well, his fear is somewhat justified. Denise has no close friends. She isn’t friendly with her family.
She has no job. There’s nothing tying her here. He was spooked. Justifiably though. Think about it. Only two things are, at this moment, keeping her here. Her own inertia and the decision we’re all waiting for.” Bea took a breath and lit a cigarette. “I misspoke. There are three things. Add what the DA does.”
“Well, I’m glad we spoke. I didn’t know about that incident in May. It puts another light on things. A better light,” Larry Kupersmith said.
“Nothing helps like a little communication sometimes. Anything else, do you think, we should discuss?”
“Well, he told me his mother was just admitted to the hospital. That led to him recalling a few years ago when she was psychotically depressed. He was devastated. He began crying when he told me that, so I asked him about his relationship with his mother. He said he was her favorite... and she used to talk to him.
“At some point, he told me about his having recurrent dreams, more like nightmares, of her when he was younger. Sometimes he’d be afraid to sleep. He felt he couldn’t talk to his father about it. His sister could talk to the father, though; she was close to him. He said his father was good, but he was distant. The kids had to fend for themselves.”
“And the residual effect?” Bea asked.
“He feels responsible for anything that happens, whether he’s at fault or not.”
“Why’s that?”
“It appears to stem from his mother’s illness. Because he was the eldest, he felt responsible for his sister being strapped by his mother when Mom was out of control, and blames himself for not doing enough. He said he felt responsible for his brother, too, but didn’t say the brother was hit. He just said the brother was quiet, more independent, more like an outsider.”
“Did Mother strap Bill too?” Bea asked.
“Yes.”
Holy shit! “Did the father help?”
“Yes, it appears so. The father would run after her and stop her, but she was hard to handle.”
“Did he say how he coped then?”
“He’d play basketball. He said it was his only outlet then. He was by himself.”
“He still plays a lot of basketball, but not alone,” Bea said.
“Well, got to run,” Larry said. “I have an appointment in a few minutes.”
“Won’t keep you then. I’m glad we spoke.”
Fraud on a Willing Court
Two and a half weeks after appearing in McGill’s court, Bea and Pitbull, defending his client company against Leslie Calhoun’s claims, were back in Concord.
As soon as Pitbull’s feet reached his podium, McGill said, “From the bench, the Court ordered plaintiff’s counsel to pay the sum of $261.25.”
Bea flinched. No such order had issued from McGill’s bench.
“Subsequently,” Pitbull immediately added, “the clerk’s office did send notice the motion for payment of legal fees was allowed.”
That bastard Pitbull. Lies, nothing but fraud upon the court.
Within a minute, McGill found Bea in contempt of a non-existent order, added some other sanctions, and a fine retroactive to a date unknown and for some reason unknown to Bea of fifty dollars per day until she paid the fine. The total sum was in the thousands of dollars, but Bea wasn’t sure how far into the thousands.
She’d wait until she got the written order before she’d begin worrying about it, but she couldn’t resist asking McGill, “Your Honor, tell me, at least, of what have I been held in contempt?”
He didn’t respond to her, but began addressing Pitbull.
The longer their discourse continued, the angrier she became. And the angrier McGill must have become, because he found she was in contempt along with her client Leslie and threatened dismissal of Leslie Calhoun’s case.
Bea told him she couldn’t believe what was occurring in his court: Leslie was in California and she couldn’t possibly know what was happening in this court. “I’ll have to write about this,” she said.
McGill said, “Be sure to spell my name right.”
He told his clerk to summon the parties of the next case.
A copy of Pitbull’s motion with McGill’s handwritten endorsement on it came in the mail, but the endorsement did not include a date by which the individual sums of money had to be paid. Not knowing what date McGill was using as a start date for the per diem fines, Bea had no idea how much in fines she was being penalized. His endorsement also didn’t say to whom payment was to be made. She decided, without a date due in the endorsement, she wouldn’t worry about it at all.
Blackmail for Blasphemy
“They can’t produce any evidence of any order, written or oral,” Bea said to Hugh as she emptied her briefcase. “And the clerk’s notice said no such thing.”
“You must have said or done something, Bea.”
“I didn’t.” She rolled her eyes. “At least not before he found me in contempt. But I sure as hell said plenty afterward.” She laughed.
Hugh said, “It doesn’t make sense.”
“Sure it does. McGill was reached. I’m not talking money, but I bet you the police chief called both the company and the judge.”
“How do you know that?”
“I don’t know that. I suspect that.”
“Okay, why do you suspect that?”
“Because the excuse the chief’s sidekick gave me was incredible. That the police wouldn’t use their power in the town because I wasn’t a Concord taxpayer!”
Hugh reached for his gin. “A nominee trust,” he said after he took a swallow. “House in Chatham.” Hugh was subtly confirming how judges are paid off without cash and without a traceable paper trail.
“You said that, I didn’t.”
He laughed.
“I can only think it,” she said. “My license can be gonzo for saying anything to disparage you guys.”
“I can blackmail you when you blaspheme me!” They laughed together this time.
“It’s a paradox,” Bea said. “McGill seems like a decent guy. I’ve heard him in criminal sessions. He’s a bit intrusive, but he’s not a nutso. Although he got some bad press recently, when he let that guy off who raped the young French girl.”
“That he did.”
Pitbull v. Archibald
Two weeks later, when Pitbull and Bea were in Concord again, a year-long circus of lies and procedural absurdities began, all of which no one, including lawyers, could possibly understand unless they lived through it.
The first detail was, McGill conditionally dismissed Leslie’s case until she or Bea paid several thousands of dollars. There was no order issued containing the exact amount to be paid, the date by which payment had to be made, or to whom payment was to be paid. No final judgment of contempt was issued.
A few weeks later, Pitbull moved to convert the contempt findings to a $3809.25 money judgment against Leslie. McGill allowed his motion. Bea requested that the remanded case be retransferred to Superior Court. Once there, Pitbull lied and said there was a contempt matter pending against Leslie.
The judge believed Pitbull and ordered the case sent back to McGill. Bea immediately filed a notice of appeal to the Appeals Court (Hugh’s brethren on the 15th floor), but then a clerk mistakenly(?) sent the case back to McGill.
In the meantime, Pitbull had served Bea twice—once in superior court and once when the case was returned to Concord—with a motion for a capeas to arrest her because she hadn’t paid any monies.
“Your Honor,” he said, “tell her to bring her toothbrush to court.”
The Boston Globe was uninterested in the story, but a reporter from the Herald was.
“Bea, it’ll only be a story if you’re put in jail.”
“It might be fun. Certainly an experience.”
“They’ll love you there. A lawyer in residence.”
“Right. For a few complaints, I probably won’t even have to buy my own cigarettes and Ben & Jerry’s.”
“Think of it as a free fat farm.” They chuckled together.
“I promise you, I’ll organize when I get there. And maybe I’ll look into bringing a class action for the hookers against the Commonwealth for not prosecuting the Johns.”
Once in court, McGill said he had erred and reduced the final money judgment against Leslie from $3809.25 to $261.25. Upon payment and motion, McGill said he might restore Leslie’s case to the active list. He further wrote, to avoid further confusion as to who was to pay what (he never said or wrote to whom and by when payment was to be made), he would make two cases out of the one:
Leslie’s case and a new one against Bea.
The very next day, a police cruiser with blue lights whirling drove to the dock. An officer boarded Costaki II, banged on the door to the salon, and when she opened it to the officer, whom she had seen on the security monitor, he handed her a summons to McGill’s court for the following week. The summons identified the caption of the new case: Pitbull, Plaintiff-in-Contempt v. Bea, Defendant-in-Contempt. The Herald reporter gave Bea several phone numbers to use if she was about to be jailed the following week.
Bea sent a motion to vacate the dismissal of Leslie’s case and a check to the court to give the money to whomever was to receive it if the case was restored to the active list. McGill’s court cashed the $261.25 check, but didn’t restore Leslie’s case to the active list. Bea had the case remanded to Superior Court. Once there, Pitbull lied again. The same judge again believed Pitbull and sent the case back to McGill. Bea filed a notice of appeal and practically personally escorted the case to the Appeals Court.
Bea hired a lawyer to handle the Pitbull-Archibald case, but when it supposedly ended, it was still unclear how much Bea was to pay, to whom, and by when. Because Bea’s license could be in jeopardy, Bea’s lawyer filed a notice of appeal on behalf of Bea and made it to the Appeals Court.
The Master Speaks
Goldblatt issued his “Master’s report.” It contained one hundred numbered paragraphs of facts summarizing the Abernathy marriage and eleven conclusions Goldblatt drew from those facts. He left the big four answers for a sitting judge to decide: who would get custody, how the marital assets were to be divided, and what would be the alimony and child support payments.
Bea believed Goldblatt had the authority to decide the Big Four, but he did not apparently believe he did. He also didn’t decide who was to be awarded the divorce, but Bea didn’t consider that important. That was more a matter of pride and not one of substance.
There were a few items that she wished Goldblatt would have changed, but on the whole, Bea was quite pleased. His findings were as follows:
“Denise remained obsessed with the incident which she regards to have been rape. Its effect on
Denise remains her bitterness and distrust of Bill, both in relation to herself and to Chloe.
“After the July 1983 incident, Denise became an alcoholic, depressed, antisocial. Bill’s drinking also increased during this period. Denise’s alcoholism did not significantly affect her ability to care for Chloe although she became less alert. Bill spent more time during this period caring for Chloe.
“Denise stopped drinking in May of 1987. Bill stopped excessive drinking in mid-1989.” The word “excessive” should not have been used. Bill had admitted he drank up to a six-pack of beer himself on some nights, but there was no testimony it was excessive. When she read it, she thought, If that is all that is negative, I can live with it.
“Denise should be capable of earnings commensurate with her technology.” Whoopee, maybe lower alimony!
“Both parents are devoted to and love Chloe.” Fair enough.
Goldblatt even considered of sufficient significance to make a finding about it that Bill administered the suppositories first. Ditto about Denise bringing Chloe with her to AA meetings, the Rape Crisis Center meeting, Victims of Sexual Addiction, where “a facilitator read passages concerning sexual abuse.”
Goldblatt also noted, “After Bill moved out of the house, Chloe acted up, refused to sleep in her old bedroom, cut her bed sheets, has had nightmares, and has been tense. Chloe is upset, tense, and anxious before and after Bill’s visits. After the visits, she punches her punching bag. However, she is reluctant for the visits to end.” Everything registered.
Although Goldblatt believed Leavitt that “Chloe had nightmares and flashbacks about Bill hurting her when she was both awake and asleep,” he concluded “Chloe’s nightmares are not necessarily characteristic of child sexual abuse.”
Lordy, lordy. He believed the “outline of Bill’s private parts” were visible in his “tight shorts.”
Goldblatt also believed Chloe later indicated to a Family Service Officer that Bill’s penis was exposed. That’s wrong. Had the child done so, the accusation would have been supported by DSS. It wasn’t. Bea wondered what effect that finding would have on the sitting judge who’d make the final decision regarding custody.
Champion! “Chloe looks to Denise and is intimidated by her while playing with Bill.” The no-touch rule also appears to have impressed him negatively: Chloe is in fear of punishment if her dad hugs her, and Denise reminds both of them of the rule—whose origin is unknown.
“Chloe’s feelings about Bill are ambivalent. She loves, misses, and fears him. She has expressed her love for him many times. During visits, Bill’s conduct is appropriate.
“Chloe’s testimony as to sexual abuse and her use of explicit terms of anatomy is not credible. I do not believe what she states happened to her when she was one year old.”
Wundebar, bravo, bingo, jump for joy!
He believed Chloe when she said she “would like to spend more time with Bill including supervised overnight visits.” But he also believed “Chloe believes she is the cause of Bill’s leaving.”
Goldblatt believed it noteworthy to mention that Leavitt had seen Chloe at least fifty times, that the DA’s Office had referred her to the Center, and that the reliability of using anatomically correct dolls for the evaluation of abuse has not been established.
Goldblatt also noted—probably because it was undisputed (no one else was present at the therapy sessions)—Chloe told Leavitt that Bill scares her on visits. The master-judge also noted that Chloe said, “My father hurt me every day when I was asleep and awake. I think he’s disgusting,” and on a play phone, told an imaginary Bill “not to kick me, scratch me, or put his penis in my mouth.”
“At a play session with Roberta,” Goldblatt wrote, “she said she imagined she saw her parents fighting and Bill telling Denise he never hurt Chloe and Denise telling Bill she believed he did. Chloe indicated she thought Bill was lying.”
Also, although he wrote “Chloe drew a picture of a grown man with an erection, a curly-haired child with an open mouth and a woman in tears,” and concluded, “Chloe believes she was sexually assaulted by Bill,” he further concluded, “drawings by themselves are not diagnostic of a particular problem.” In other words, he, like Bea and Bill, didn’t know the circumstances under which the picture had been drawn.
He did accept Leavitt’s assertion that Chloe has been improving since her therapy began and that she still has anxiety symptoms. Of course, everyone testified Chloe would need continued therapy, and Goldblatt also found that.
Significantly, Goldblatt found “there is no single profile of a child molester. Bill showed no signs of personality disorders of mental illness nor did he fill any possible child molester profile. He has a reputation of being a good man. His supervisor and fellow employees respect and like him.” Triple Bravo! The thigh man did his job too!
Special Master Goldblatt made the following General Findings:
1. The marriage is irretrievably broken. They’ll get their divorce.Bea immediately made copies for Demos Eleutheria and, of course, Bill.
2. Denise is presently in need of financial help. She’ll get some alimony.
3. Denise is capable of earning additional money. Malingerer.
4. Bill can presently provide Denise with additional financial help. Husband’s burden anticipated.
5. Denise believes Bill raped her. What we’ve been saying.
6. Chloe believes Bill sexually abused her. Brainwashed.
7. Chloe’s present therapy is not directed to reconciling her with Bill. Damn right. A shame.
8. Denise’s continued obsession with the July 1983 incident adversely affects Chloe’s attitude toward Bill. Yessiree.
9. Bill’s present conduct during visits with Chloe is appropriate and not the cause of Chloe’s ambivalent feeling toward him. Quadruple bravo!
10. Both parties are competent to carry out parental duties. Mmmmm.
11. Chloe’s statements to professionals about Bill’s actions are unreliable. They are equally compatible with fantasy or pressure resulting from the visits. Quintuple bravo! Way to go!
Mel Kanter smiled and said, “Is he paid up?”
Red Luther said, “Great job, Bea.”
Hugh said, “You were lucky. He’ll still go to prison.”
Toffett and DeSegonzac graciously accepted Bea’s thanks.
Mice and Men.
Part 22 will post by Sunday, September 14th
