Chapter 21 - THE CRIMINAL CASE NARROWS
Constance faced criminal charges primarily for the current incident.
Child endangerment/reckless conduct.
Destruction of Milo’s property? The bear had little market value, enormous sentimental value. Property offense remained minor.
Assault? She snatched the bear, not Milo, then created a foreseeable risk by throwing it into active flames while a four-year-old immediately reached.
Historical conduct around Anton was harder.
Potential misuse of signature.
False instrument.
Depending statute and actual legal effect.
Prosecutors charged only one count tied to a foundation directive that had been submitted as an authentic Anton-approved governance instruction after his written revocation.
Other family directives lacked sufficient legal significance for criminal prosecution.
Elder-abuse theories were reviewed.
Not charged.
Why?
Anton was ill but not proven coerced physically.
Constance filtered access and misrepresented wishes.
Wrong.
Potentially civil or professional misconduct in context.
The criminal evidence did not support every ugly moral fact as a separate offense.
Good.
May you like
The prosecution did not need to make her a monster in every legal category.
The fireplace was enough to show what she could do when control slipped.
