Chapter 17 - The Divorce Deposition
Daniel’s deposition lasted six hours.
I did not attend in person.
Rachel did.
I read the transcript later.
Question.
Did you know your mother intentionally gave Claire the wrong dinner date?
Answer.
Yes.
Question.
When did you learn that?
Answer.
Before dinner.
Question.
Why did you not correct it?
Answer.
My mother said Claire’s presence could disrupt the acquisition discussion.
Question.
Did you agree?
Answer.
Yes.
Question.
Did you know the transaction required Claire’s consent?
Answer.
Yes.
Question.
Then how would excluding her help?
Long pause.
Answer.
We hoped to finalize terms first.
Question.
So you wanted to present her with a completed arrangement?
Answer.
Yes.
Question.
Did you expect her to feel pressured to approve?
Answer.
Yes.
I stopped reading.
That was enough.
Not every betrayal requires shouting.
Sometimes it appears in a transcript.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Daniel admitted the affair.
He admitted the Fairmont.
He admitted discussing me with Vanessa.
He admitted concealing Baycrest.
He admitted helping his mother create the lifetime occupancy letter, though he denied inserting my signature.
Then he admitted something I had not known.
Question.
Why did you repeatedly ask Claire to remain publicly invisible regarding Harrington?
Answer.
Investors responded better when they believed I controlled the company.
Question.
Was that true?
Answer.
No.
Question.
Who controlled the largest voting block?
Answer.
Claire.
Question.
Who contributed the majority of emergency capital?
Answer.
Claire.
Question.
Who guaranteed the two principal credit facilities?
Answer.
Claire.
Question.
Then why tell investors otherwise?
Daniel paused.
Answer.
Because I was embarrassed.
There it was.
The same word Linda never used directly.
But it had shaped everything.
Daniel was embarrassed that his wife’s success protected him.
So he accepted the protection.
Then hid the protector.
I closed the transcript.
Rachel asked.
“Do you want to pursue the maximum financial claim available in the divorce?”
I thought about it.
California property law and our prenup simplified much of the division.
My premarital assets remained mine.
His Harrington shares remained primarily his separate property, subject to certain marital issues.
I could fight over reimbursements.
Compensation.
Misused community funds.
The affair expenses were comparatively small.
I could make the divorce brutal.
I chose not to.
“I want what is mine.”
“And reimbursement for unauthorized marital funds?”
“Yes.”
“Punitive strategy?”
“No.”
Rachel nodded.
I continued.
“I don't want to become Linda.”
That sentence surprised both of us.
Linda believed every relationship was a balance sheet.
Who owed whom.
Who had more.
Who should surrender.
I was finished living that way.
The divorce settlement moved quickly after Daniel’s deposition.
Then Marcus was charged with multiple financial offenses related to Baycrest and the offshore transfer.
Linda was not charged with the same core offenses, but investigators continued reviewing her role and the payment.
Westbridge publicly denied knowledge of the undisclosed arrangements.
Vanessa avoided criminal exposure and settled separate civil claims.
The crisis was narrowing.
Until Daniel made one final request.
He wanted to buy back control of Harrington.
And he had found an investor willing to finance him.
May you like
The investor’s name made Rachel go silent.
Vanessa Cole.
