Chapter 8 - EVELYN’S DEFENSE
Evelyn denied intending harm.
Her attorney argued she believed Noah was not in immediate danger and wanted to demonstrate that I reacted excessively before assessing him.
That defense made me furious.
Then I realized it was also revealing.
She admitted enough.
She had interfered to test me.
Her lawyer argued the shove occurred during a struggle over the inhaler.
The camera showed otherwise.
I reached.
She tossed it away.
I moved.
She shoved me.
Physical sequence was clear.
The custody file complicated her position further.
The camera was not installed for general security.
It was installed to collect material about me.
Could recording inside a home be lawful under every circumstance?
Complex.
Ownership.
Consent.
Audio versus video.
Expectation of privacy.
Location.
State law.
The authorities evaluated those questions separately.
I did not need every recording to support criminal charges.
The device and selected footage already helped establish intent surrounding other conduct.
Evelyn’s attorney eventually stopped arguing that the camera had an innocent purpose.
Instead:
“A misguided attempt to document concerns.”
May you like
Better wording.
Same behavior.
