Anika asked about the forged easement.
Peter said he knew documents had been prepared but denied creating the signature.
He said he had assumed the association office obtained consent.
I asked whether he had looked at the document before telling contractors to enter.
He said he had.
I asked whether it contained my name.
He admitted it did.
The conversation became very quiet.
Peter said his father’s old development plan had always seemed like unfinished business.
He believed finishing it would prove his family had done something useful for the neighborhood.
I told him the neighborhood did not owe his family a road through my daughter’s home.
He flinched at the mention of Lucy.
Then I showed him the photograph someone had mailed of her walking to school.
Peter stared at it and said he had never seen it.
I could not tell whether that was true.
Anika ended the meeting when Peter began making broad apologies without answering further factual questions.
She told me not to mistake a confession of motive for proof of every act.
The money arrangement had become clearer.
The threat to Lucy was still unresolved.
On the way home I realized that the oldest danger in this dispute was not a forged law.
It was Peter’s belief that an ambition inherited from his father mattered more than the people who now lived beside it.
A Deposition Is Not a Showdown
The civil case reached the deposition stage after the access demands were withdrawn.
Anika explained what would happen before I entered the conference room.
I would answer questions under oath while a court reporter recorded my words.
Opposing counsel could challenge my recollection and ask about gaps in the evidence.
It was not a place for a dramatic speech.
The questions began with simple facts about my purchase and the condition of the property.
Then the lawyer asked whether I had disliked Vivian before the notices began.
I said I had found her manner unpleasant but had not previously accused her of unlawful conduct.
He asked why I had not signed the access agreement when the developer offered payment.
I explained the unresolved title, traffic, and drainage concerns.
He asked whether I could personally identify the people who painted the wall.
I said I could not.
He asked whether I had personally seen Peter remove the gate hinge.
I said I had not.
The answers felt unsatisfying because they left room for uncertainty.
