Chapter 10 - MARGARET'S COUNTERATTACK
Margaret filed for emergency temporary guardianship.
Her argument:
Rachel created the dangerous situation by delegating care.
Rachel’s work schedule remained unstable.
Sophie required nutritional rehabilitation and close supervision.
Margaret’s home was familiar.
Rachel nearly exploded.
“You starved her.”
Margaret’s lawyer answered:
“Alleged.”
Important.
Not yet adjudicated.
Then Margaret produced food logs.
Breakfast:
oatmeal.
Lunch:
school meal.
Dinner:
chicken.
Snacks:
fruit.
Rachel stared.
Fake?
Maybe.
The logs were handwritten.
Dates matched.
Then Karen Mills compared them to school cafeteria records.
Several days marked:
SCHOOL LUNCH.
But Sophie had not purchased lunch.
No transaction.
Then logs said:
DINNER — CHICKEN.
Sophie had texted Rachel:
CRACKERS.
Then one entry:
BREAKFAST — EGGS.
The grocery loyalty data showed no eggs purchased that week.
Margaret said she bought them cash.
Possible.
Then a bigger problem.
The handwriting changed.
Forensic document examiner found multiple entries likely written in a single sitting.
Not absolute proof.
Strong.
Margaret’s credibility began cracking.
Then Daniel Cross pivoted.
Even if Margaret made mistakes, was Rachel fit now?
That was the right legal question.
May you like
Rachel could not win only by proving Margaret bad.
She had to prove Sophie safe with her.
