Chapter 6 - Aunt E
Emily Vale walked into police station voluntarily.
Fifty-one.
Red hair streaked gray.
Laboratory scientist.
Daniel’s estranged sister.
She admitted sending birthday cards to Mia.
She admitted knowing Mia was Daniel’s biological daughter.
She denied taking Mia.
“Then who is Aunt E?” Detective Grant asked.
“I am.”
“Why secretly contact child?”
“I never contacted her directly. Cards went through Rachel.”
Rachel confirmed.
She thought “Aunt E” was Thomas Carter’s distant relative.
Emily had never asked Mia to hide anything.
Why cards?
Guilt.
Emily had worked Westbridge when sample error happened.
Did she change label?
“Yes.”
Emma stared.
Daniel’s email said whoever changed it wasn't accident.
Emily explained.
She manually changed electronic secondary identifier because she believed physical vial had been mislabeled earlier.
Her intent was correction.
She had two conflicting identifiers:
barcode read DB-414.
processing sheet read TC-441.
Supervisor Martin Shaw instructed her reconcile based on paper chain.
She changed database to TC-441.
But vial physically contained Daniel sample.
Thus her “correction” enabled use.
Was substitution intentional?
Emily believed yes because someone had switched physical outer sleeves before her intervention.
Who?
She spent years investigating.
Daniel later joined.
They reconciled shortly before his death.
Why did he tell Emma he had no sister?
Their estrangement predated Emma.
He was ashamed of family conflict and simply erased Emily from stories.
Wrong, but unrelated to sample error.
Then Emily revealed key fact:
Daniel's preserved sample should never have been in processing room that day.
It was scheduled for destruction weeks later.
Someone deliberately removed it from long-term storage.
Access badge:
Martin Shaw.
But Shaw may have been moving multiple samples for audit.
Camera footage lost.
Motive unclear.
Could Shaw intentionally substitute to improve pregnancy chance because Thomas’s sample poor quality?
Rachel Carter’s old file showed Thomas’s sample had extremely low motility.
Shaw had warned procedure likely fail.
Rachel and Thomas insisted try.
A successful pregnancy improved clinic statistics.
Would Shaw secretly replace poor sample with better one?
Former nurse remembered him saying:
“Patients pay us for babies, not excuses.”
Not proof.
Then archived insurance claim contained notation:
ALTERNATE SAMPLE APPROVED.
Approved by whom?
Signature:
THOMAS CARTER.
Rachel stared.
“My husband?”
Signature looked authentic.
Did Thomas know?
Maybe.
Could Thomas have authorized donor sperm without telling Rachel?
That would explain intentional substitution but not why Daniel’s sample specifically.
Then lawyer found consent addendum.
Thomas had authorized anonymous donor backup if his sample unusable.
Rachel had signed no such consent.
Clinic policy required both.
Shaw may have used Daniel as unauthorized “donor.”
Why Daniel?
Available sample awaiting destruction.
No donor compensation.
No traceable donor program.
Convenient.
If so, Emily’s database correction hid origin.
Daniel later discovered.
But central mystery still had second girl in house.
Emily denied staging.
Phone location placed her three states away.
Then hidden camera was traced.
Purchased six months earlier by:
Ethan Cole.
May you like
Emma turned toward man who had stood behind Claire at door.
Ethan’s face went white.
