Chapter 7 - The Deed Would Not Have Solved Claire’s Problem
Caroline gave Ethan a blunt legal answer.
Even if he had signed transfer deed, it would not erase historical title questions.
A grantee receives whatever interest grantor legally owns, subject to existing claims.
Claire seemed to believe recording new deed would “make house hers” beyond challenge.
Wrong.
The $1.25 million lender had also misunderstood.
Their underwriting was reckless.
The lender could pursue Claire for misrepresentation.
They could not force Ethan to convey.
So tearing deed did not destroy Claire’s legal ownership.
She never had ownership.
It destroyed the future transaction she had built financing around.
That was why she looked horrified.
Then Rachel’s estate file.
When Rachel died, she left will:
personal property and financial assets mostly to Ethan,
separate inheritance to Emma,
no claim to mansion listed.
Did that mean she abandoned title issue?
Not necessarily.
A cause of action might pass to estate, depending.
But her handwritten notes showed she did not want mansion.
She wanted correction of Peter’s name.
So Ethan decided two tracks:
Claire’s conduct/loan dealt with legally.
Peter Dawson history reviewed independently.
He would not use one as bargaining chip for other.
Richard offered:
“I’ll pay Claire’s loan if she signs away anything connected to house.”
Ethan stared.
“No.”
“Why?”
“Because that is exactly how this family got here.”
Private settlement to stop discomfort.
No.
Then independent forensic accountant, Maya Chen, reconstructed 2001 transactions.
Evidence:
$642,870 disappeared through vendor adjustment chain.
Peter’s credentials used on two entries.
But network logs showed access from executive-floor terminal while Peter was documented at offsite inspection.
Who had terminal access?
Malcolm Voss.
Richard.
Two accounting managers.
Richard had no technical login? Could use terminal but not credentials. He denied knowledge.
Malcolm had motive and later connections to Keene.
Probability increasingly pointed Malcolm.
Then one surviving accounting manager, Susan Price, gave statement.
Peter had accused Malcolm two days before arrest.
Susan heard:
“If you make me sign this, I’m taking everything to Richard.”
Malcolm answered:
“Richard already knows enough.”
Did Richard know?
Richard denied.
Susan believed phrase bluff.
No proof.
Then Peter was arrested after internal audit packet prepared by Malcolm himself.
That was conflict investigators overlooked.
Why?
Malcolm presented himself as discovering fraud.
Classic possibility.
The original prosecutor had relied heavily on Bennett internal audit.
If audit compromised, Peter’s conviction shaky.
Posthumous exoneration might be possible through court? Some jurisdictions have mechanisms, but don't overpromise. Texas posthumous writs rare. Could seek district attorney review / public declaration.
Ethan funded independent legal petition but not outcome yet.
Then Margaret came privately.
“I have something.”
A cassette recorder.
Peter and Richard.
Margaret had recorded meeting? Why.
She said Richard began carrying recorder during scandal at counsel's advice.
After his meeting with Peter, Margaret took tape because she feared litigation.
Richard thought it lost.
On tape Peter said:
“I did alter one entry.”
Everyone froze.
Was he guilty after all?
Peter continued:
“I altered it back.”
He had reversed a false Malcolm entry.
That reversal became evidence against him because audit interpreted it as cover-up.
Then Peter said:
“Check Keene account. Malcolm is moving the money.”
Richard answered:
“I will.”
Tape ended.
Ethan stared at Richard.
“You promised.”
Richard looked broken.
“I checked.”
“What did you find?”
“Enough to know Peter might be right.”
May you like
There.
Richard had known much earlier than 2006.
