“Yes, they were, up until twelve ten when they moved to the porch.”
“And that’s when I spoke to Misty. I don’t keep a schedule of every person I speak to for two minutes at a function like this.”
“We were able to verify the witness’s timeline based on other witness statements that put her in the ladies’ lounge prior to twelve thirty-five.”
“We’re going to quibble over a few minutes? This is ridiculous!”
Blair was getting agitated on the recording, but she was also growing agitated in the defendant’s chair. It was clear that she felt she was being ridiculed or attacked.
“Charles,” Blair said on the disk, “I want to leave. Now.”
“Detective,” the attorney said, “do you have any physical evidence tying my client to her son’s murder?”
“We’re still in the middle of our investigation.”
“Then we will be leaving until such time as you have any evidence—because it sounds to me like you’re fishing.”
“You’re free to leave, but be available for more questions, Mrs. Caldwell.”
She rolled her eyes. “Really. More asinine questions.”
The lawyer put his hand on Blair’s arm. “Blair, we should go.”
The detectives rose, gathered their files, and stepped out.
The recording continued to play.
“Where’s John?” Blair asked.
“He’s in the waiting room.”
“Why aren’t they asking him these questions? Why me?”
“They did interview him.”
“This is the most—”
John entered the room. He looked a mess—there was no better description. His clothing was rumpled, his shirt stained—perhaps coffee—and he had dark circles under his eyes as if he hadn’t slept in a week. “The detectives said you can go. Blair—”
In less than a blink of an eye, Blair started crying. She threw her arms around John and sobbed. “Oh, God, John, it was awful! Why are they doing this to me? Why aren’t they looking for the real killer? Why ask me all these awful questions?”
John patted her on the back. “It’s okay, Blair. It’ll be okay. I’ll take you home.”
The clip ended.
Max stared at John. The shock on his face was clear—seeing Blair in action with the detectives and then with him.
Max already suspected what Blair’s defense would be—she was an attorney, she was used to rigid questions—but it was also clear that she was manipulating her husband.
At least to Max it was clear. Was it clear to the jury?
Dillon said, “What you witnessed here is classic sociopathic and narcissistic behavior. First, the indignation of being detained and questioned—she’s above it. Everyone else’s recollections are wrong, not hers, and if she’s wrong it’s because they’re nitpicking her. Second, the complete reversal of emotions when her husband walks into the room. Her body language and tone immediately changed.”
“What could be her motive for killing her son?” the DA asked.
“I can’t speak to motive without personally evaluating Mrs. Caldwell—”
“Objection,” the defense said. “Mrs. Caldwell is innocent until proven guilty.”
“Sustained. Jury will disregard. Please rephrase the question or move along.”
The DA said, “Dr. Kincaid, considering that Peter Caldwell was not sexually assaulted, what motive could there be for his death?”
Dillon paused long enough that the judge asked him if he understood the question.
“Yes, Your Honor, I understand. The answer is both simple and complex. What we need to remember is more what didn’t happen. He wasn’t sexually assaulted. It wasn’t a crime of anger—such as an abused child who is beaten to death, or someone in a violent rage. He wasn’t brutalized in any way. It wasn’t spontaneous. In fact, his murder was almost serene. He was drugged to the point of losing consciousness. He was suffocated and didn’t struggle, telling us that he never regained consciousness. Whoever killed him didn’t want him to suffer, but also clearly didn’t want him to live. Why? I can only speculate.”
“Yet you’re an expert witness,” the DA said. “You can speculate.”
“Based on the original psych evaluation of Mrs. Caldwell and her interviews with police, not once did she ask any specific questions about her son’s murder. She showed no emotional connection to her son. In her outburst to her husband, she specifically said, ‘Why are they doing this to me? Why ask me all these awful questions?’ While on the one hand it’s absolutely normal for a parent to be frustrated with law enforcement for not being out looking for their child’s killer, not once did she ask the police why they weren’t doing more to find the real killer, as she said to her husband. She reserved those statements solely for her husband.
“Narcissists want to be the focus of everyone in their lives. They need the attention. Peter Caldwell was, by all accounts, a loved and exceptional child. He was a good student. He and his father shared a love of baseball. His father doted on him. Took him on field trips. Volunteered in the school. Spent time with him. One thing stood out in the original psych evaluation. When Dr. Opner asked about time spent with her son, Mrs. Caldwell responded…” Dillon looked down at his notes. “This is on page seventeen of the evaluation, Your Honor. ‘We do everything with Peter. Our lives revolve around him. In fact, John brought him on our anniversary vacation to Cabo last year.’ She said John brought. Not they brought. I suspect this was a sore point with her, and one of the triggers in her plan to remove her son from the family unit.”
“Objection.”
“Sustained. The jury will disregard the last sentence and it will be stricken from the record.”
“Dr. Kincaid, do you think that Blair Caldwell was jealous of the attention her husband gave to her son?”
“Yes, I do.”
“Is this common in other cases you’ve consulted where a parent killed a child?”
“Objection!”
The DA said, “Your Honor, I’m simply asking Dr. Kincaid based on his extensive experience and already stipulated credentials to offer an expert opinion as to cases similar to this.”
“The question itself prejudices the jury.”
The judge said, “Jurors, the question presented to Dr. Kincaid reflects a generic observation regarding all suspects and victims within Dr. Kincaid’s scope of knowledge, not specifically the defendant. Proceed.”
“Dr. Kincaid?” the DA prompted.
“There is not one answer to that question,” Dillon said. “I would focus specifically on premeditated homicides. There are surprisingly few. Most parental-involved deaths involve neglect or gross abuse, and most of those involve very young children who are more fragile. In the cases where an older child—over the age of six—is killed, if the parent is not addicted to alcohol or drugs, which impairs their judgment or creates a violent home, or where there is no history of abuse, there are sometimes cases that are technically child abuse called Munchausen syndrome by proxy, where a parent or caregiver fabricates or creates symptoms in a child. In eighty-five percent of the cases, the mother is responsible for causing the illness, usually through poison.”