Chapter 12 - The Money That Belonged to the Girls
The twins had money.
They did not know.
They were seven.
They should not have needed to know.
Their grandfather Robert Mercer had arranged education trusts after their birth. Nothing extravagant by Mercer standards, but substantial enough to cover future schooling and provide a safety cushion.
Eleanor and Julian were co-trustees.
Trust terms prohibited self-dealing without independent approval.
Yet $220,000 had moved from the twins’ trust into a promissory note issued by Mercer Medical Properties.
Julian’s company.
Interest payments were sporadic.
No independent approval found.
Eleanor’s signature appeared.
Again.
She denied.
Digital analysis showed signature image identical to one used on other documents.
Now children’s assets were involved.
Julian’s defense argued transaction was investment, not theft.
Promissory note existed.
Interest rate commercially plausible.
Could trust invest in related business with proper authorization?
Potentially under some circumstances.
Problem was authorization.
And undisclosed conflict.
So civil fiduciary breach strong.
Criminal intent required more.
Then Caroline asked:
“If I had gotten girls back, would I have been able to demand trust accounting?”
Her lawyer:
“Yes, as their custodial parent you likely could have sought information and court oversight.”
There.
Julian had financial incentive for Caroline not to regain standing.
Again, not proof sole motive.
But relevant.
Then Eleanor’s role.
She had trusted Julian with trust administration.
Had she been negligent?
Possibly.
Independent counsel said yes.
She had not reviewed statements regularly.
She owned that.
“I signed too many things without reading before he started copying my name.”
Important.
Not all bad paperwork forged.
Some real signatures came from trust.
That created source material.
Then one older transfer of $40k actually had Eleanor genuine signature and was approved.
Not every transfer fraudulent.
Distinguishing increased credibility.
Then children’s trust placed under independent corporate trustee.
Julian removed by court pending litigation.
Money partly recovered as clinic note called due.
Clinic sold one commercial parcel to repay.
Patients unaffected.
No sudden collapse.
Then clinic partners buy Julian’s interest under supervised transaction.
His professional career ending.
Financial identity ending too.
Then plea negotiations.
Julian offers to plead:
confirmed child medication offense,
forgery/false instrument counts,
certain financial fraud counts,
custody-related evidence tampering,
fiduciary breach-related criminal counts where support.
In exchange prosecution drops weaker speculative elder-medication counts that cannot be chemically proven and avoids charging conduct evidence insufficient.
This is realistic.
Caroline is consulted as victim, not decision-maker.
Eleanor too.
Neither gets veto.
Maya/Elena represented through advocate.
Then question: Did Julian mean to injure Maya?
Prosecution believes intent was sedation/control, not serious bodily injury.
Dose still reckless and dangerous.
That matters sentencing.
No claim attempted murder.
Then Julian asks to provide statement before plea.
He admits giving Maya medication on several occasions.
How many?
Four.
Matches Elena roughly.
Why?
“When she became fixated on her mother.”
No medical justification.
He rationalized calming.
Did he give Elena?
Once, he says, but she spit it out? Elena doesn't remember. Could be harmful new. Better no.
Did he give Eleanor without consent?
He admits twice dissolving medication when she refused, telling himself she later would agree.
Other episodes uncertain.
Did he ever drug Caroline?
“No.”
No proof otherwise.
Good.
Did he steal Caroline laptop?
He admits taking it after she left, not burglary? Wait burglary happened while she had left home temporarily? She said car broken into. Maybe he had access to spare key? He arranged someone? Dangerous. Let's clarify: laptop theft from car. He denies. Device later at clinic storage. How get? He says he found it in house before she left? Contradicts serial/toll. Maybe evidence proves.
Could be clinic manager found in Julian trunk? Hmm.
Let's set Julian admits he took laptop from Caroline’s car while it was parked outside attorney office using spare key, then staged broken window? That becomes property crime. Maybe too much.
But could be. Yet source deeper secret. Let's include nonviolent.
He had a tracker? Let's avoid.
Maybe investigators prove his cousin Kevin picked up laptop. Not necessary.
Let's say Julian admits he removed the laptop from the marital home after she fled; Caroline had mistakenly believed it was in car? But she filed car break-in because papers stolen. Let's simplify by saying laptop stolen from house while she was gone, not car. Earlier we said car. Could be inconsistency. Need preserve. Better: car was broken into, laptop stolen. Later device found. Julian now says he bought laptop back from “someone” but won't name; implausible. Maybe prosecution doesn't resolve. Keep unresolved not vital.
Then fake farewell email.
He admits.
Why?
“To stop Amy from escalating.”
And missing-person report.
He wanted family to believe Caroline chose absence.
Then biggest admission:
He had read Caroline’s blue-box copies before she hid them? No.
He knew she was documenting him.
Then fatherhood.
“I thought if girls forgot her, they would stop being torn between us.”
Caroline later says:
“You wanted peace that required our children losing half themselves.”
Yes.
Then Eleanor asks through impact advocate:
“Did you love us?”
Julian says yes.
Eleanor:
“That doesn’t make what you did less dangerous.”
No need direct meeting maybe later restorative after sentencing.
Then sentencing not yet.
Before plea hearing, a surprising witness appears:
Dr. Steven Cole.
He turns over a voicemail from Julian one week before current incident.
Julian:
Maya keeps asking about Caroline. I need something stronger than therapy.
Cole called back and refused.
He saved voicemail because it bothered him.
Why wait?
He says he feared professional fallout and initially convinced himself no action followed.
When news broke, he contacted lawyer then police.
He owns delay.
This confirms premeditation-ish: planned medication approach.
Not spontaneous.
Then one line at end voicemail:
If she stays awake, she remembers.
May you like
Chilling.
Cliffhanger: A voicemail saved by Julian’s colleague showed he had been seeking a stronger way to suppress Maya’s repeated memories before the day she was drugged, ending his claim that the station incident had been a single impulsive mistake.
