Chapter 19 - MARLENE KNEW DEREK COULD LOSE HIS SHARES
Marlene agreed to deposition.
Not out of generosity.
Her own civil settlement required cooperation with investigations tied to the original crime.
She had completed her sentence.
Lived quietly in a condominium outside Dayton.
No contact with Emma.
Her attorney sat beside her.
Allison asked:
“When did you first learn about Section 18?”
“2007.”
“Did Derek know?”
“Not then.”
“When did you tell him?”
Silence.
Then:
“After his engagement.”
To me.
My stomach tightened.
“Why?”
“Family planning.”
Allison did not react.
“Explain.”
Marlene looked toward me once.
Then away.
“Derek told me Hannah’s mother left her a house.”
There.
“He wanted to refinance debts using both household assets after marriage.”
“Did you explain Section 18?”
“I told him he could not use company pressure to force her.”
Good.
Then:
“He thought the clause was unenforceable because of the 2013 amendment.”
“Did you tell him the amendment might be invalid?”
Long silence.
“Yes.”
My hands became cold.
“So Derek knew coercing me over separately owned property could endanger his Vaughn units?”
“Yes.”
Before the attack.
“How long before?”
“About a year.”
That changed the motive—not completely, but significantly.
He did not push me because he wanted to trigger the clause.
Obviously.
He believed the violence would never be recognized as intentional financial coercion.
Because the entire plan depended on:
accident,
incapacity,
devoted husband narrative,
no criminal conviction.
If I could not speak—
Section 18 never triggered because no adjudicated misconduct existed.
If I signed voluntarily—
no trigger.
If I appeared unstable and Derek obtained authority—
he could argue legitimate family management.
They needed the violence invisible not only to gain my house.
They also needed it invisible to preserve his family wealth.
Marlene knew that.
That explained why she wiped the phone.
Why Derek ripped down the visible camera.
Why they called 911 eventually.
The original crime already had enough motive.
Now another pressure sat underneath:
If the truth surfaced, Derek could lose millions.
Allison asked:
“Did Section 18 influence your actions that night?”
Marlene’s face tightened.
“Yes.”
There.
“What did you believe would happen if Hannah told police Derek intentionally pushed her over property?”
“The clause could activate.”
“How much were Derek’s units worth then?”
“Maybe four million.”
“And now?”
She shook her head.
“More.”
Eleven.
Then:
“Why didn’t you call 911 immediately?”
Marlene cried.
Not dramatically.
“I was trying to decide how to save him.”
There.
Not how to save Hannah.
Not the unborn child.
Him.
Then:
“Did you want Hannah dead?”
“No.”
“Did you want her unable to speak?”
Marlene closed her eyes.
“I told myself the hospital would make her better.”
“That wasn’t my question.”
Long silence.
“I knew it would be easier if she didn’t contradict Derek immediately.”
Horrible.
Precise.
Useful.
Then Allison asked:
“Did you participate in forging the 2013 amendment?”
“No.”
“Did you know Edwin was dead when it was dated?”
“Yes.”
“Then why did you place it in the governance binder?”
Marlene looked toward the table.
“Because Charles said the signature page came from an earlier draft.”
“Did you believe him?”
“At first.”
“Later?”
“No.”
There.
The family company had spent years carrying a document its controller suspected was invalid because the valid rule was inconvenient.
Same pattern.
Again.
The arbitrator ordered full document reconstruction.
And Patricia Vaughn—who had publicly accused me of exploiting Emma—
was suddenly at risk of something herself.
Because she had signed the 2013 board certification saying:
All continuity amendments duly authorized.
May you like
Her signature.
Her problem.
Related Stories
