Then she asked whether I needed help carrying the heavy boxes to storage.
I accepted, and we finished the shift without discussing the billionaire again.
Chapter 27: The Second Examination
The second document examination focused on the signatures attributed to Miriam and Esther.
A qualified examiner compared the disputed authorization with verified writings from the same period.
She reviewed letters, employment forms, banking records, and documents prepared while Miriam’s right hand was injured.
She declined to declare a single signature genuine or false from one photocopy.
Instead, she described several features inconsistent with the known examples and recommended inspection of the original document.
The original had not been located in Pike’s corporate archive.
The estate said it believed the paper had been transferred to an outside closing service years earlier.
Naomi requested the service’s records and a full account of the document’s custody.
The uncertainty frustrated me because I wanted someone to say clearly what happened.
The examiner told me that a responsible conclusion sometimes began by admitting which evidence remained unavailable.
She asked whether my mother had kept examples of her writing while recovering from the broken hand.
I remembered birthday cards, grocery lists, and the label on a school project she had helped me make.
Celia and I searched a box of childhood papers beneath my bed.
We found a card signed during the winter in question.
Miriam had written with a stiff, upright style different from her usual flowing letters.
The examiner documented its origin and explained how it might help establish known characteristics.
She warned us not to interpret every difference as proof of forgery.
People signed differently under stress, injury, and ordinary variation.
That warning was important because I wanted the evidence to agree with my anger.
The court later authorized a supervised search for the original transfer authorization.
The closing service produced a box of archived files with a damaged label and a partially legible tracking number.
Inside was a carbon copy, not an original signed page.
It contained an attachment that had not appeared in the public filing.
The attachment listed member objections and noted that Miriam Carter requested a recorded vote.
A handwritten instruction said the objections should not be circulated with the final summary.
The person who wrote the instruction was not immediately identified.
The attachment supported the conclusion that the objections existed when the transfer was prepared.
It did not establish which person suppressed them or what authority the signers believed they possessed.
Naomi told us the case would continue to require testimony and accounting analysis.
