“Lena deserves the truth,” I said.
Gwen took a step closer.
“You destroyed my family.”
I moved toward the pharmacy counter, where other customers were standing.
“I won’t continue this conversation,” I replied.
She did not follow me.
I completed the purchase and left through the main entrance without looking back.
In the parking lot I wrote down the exchange before memory softened its edges.
Then I called Tara Mills to discuss whether the contact should be reported under the existing safety plan.
Tara advised me to document it and inform the investigators, especially because Gwen had referred to the video.
She also reminded me that I did not have to confront Gwen to demonstrate courage.
Avoiding a dangerous exchange could be the strongest choice available.
That evening Ian suggested we install a doorbell camera near the porch.
I agreed but insisted on mounting it in a way that respected neighboring privacy.
I would not use surveillance as a license to watch everyone on the street.
I wanted evidence of people approaching my doors, not a new reason for anyone to fear me.
The prosecutor handling the vandalism matter met with me in a small office overlooking the courthouse parking lot.
He explained that Gwen’s alleged role in arranging the garage intrusion was distinct from Evan’s collision case.
Both cases involved overlapping witnesses, but they would be evaluated under different legal standards and timelines.
The state intended to rely on messages, payment records, Patrick’s account, and supporting testimony.
The prosecutor warned that witnesses sometimes changed their stories when faced with cross-examination.
He asked me to keep my statement limited to what I observed and the effects on my family.
I said I understood.
Then he asked whether Gwen had ever offered to pay for the damage.
“No,” I replied.
“She’s blamed me for it.”
I showed him the insurance paperwork and the photographs of the broken lantern.
He was most interested in the dated records and the costs directly related to the alleged acts.
The sentimental value of Maya’s lantern mattered to us, but it was difficult to measure in a restitution calculation.
I knew that before I entered the room.
Still, hearing the distinction aloud made my throat tighten.
The prosecutor did not minimize it.
“The process can address conduct and certain losses,” he said.
“It cannot restore everything.”
I appreciated his clarity.
When the meeting ended, I walked through the courthouse plaza and watched a little boy chase pigeons between the benches.
