Chapter 5 - CAMILLE’S VERSION
Camille requested to speak with Vincent through attorneys.
He refused.
Then Lila asked:
“Is she sorry?”
Vincent realized he did not know.
So he agreed to one recorded, lawyer-mediated conversation.
No private room.
No intimidation.
Camille appeared by video from detention housing pending bond review.
She looked thinner.
Vincent felt almost nothing.
That frightened him.
“Why?” he asked.
Camille closed eyes.
“I thought I could control it.”
“Her?”
“No.”
“The damage?”
“Yes.”
There.
Then:
“Hale told me the exposure would create measurable decline but not permanent injury if we stopped on schedule.”
“Schedule?”
“Six months.”
Exactly where they were.
Then:
“And after?”
“NeuroVista’s therapy would begin.”
“Therapy that works?”
Camille looked down.
“We didn’t know.”
Vincent laughed once.
“You blinded a child to test whether something might help.”
“I didn’t think of it as blinding.”
“What did you call it?”
“Induction.”
The word made him sick.
Clinical language can hide violence.
Then Camille continued:
“Hale said the optic changes would mimic the disease model and then reverse.”
“Did you verify?”
“He showed me animal data.”
“Did you speak to another doctor?”
“No.”
“Why?”
“You know why.”
“Say it.”
“Because they would stop us.”
There.
Then:
“Did you love Lila?”
Camille started crying.
“Yes.”
Vincent looked away.
Love does not prevent harm.
Sometimes it makes excuses more dangerous.
Then:
“Why keep going when she begged not to eat?”
Camille’s voice broke.
“Because every day I told myself we were too close to the end to stop.”
Sunk cost.
Fear of exposure.
Career redemption.
Money.
Control.
Then she said:
“And because I knew what you would do if you found out.”
Vincent looked.
“What would I do?”
“You would destroy Hale.”
“Legally?”
Camille almost smiled through tears.
“Would you have?”
Six months ago?
Maybe not.
He might have used violence.
Her fear was not invented.
That did not excuse hurting Lila.
Both.
Then:
“Did you think I’d hurt you?”
“Yes.”
“Did that make poisoning Lila safer?”
“No.”
Good.
Then Camille said something unexpected.
“I tried to stop twice.”
The texts supported one attempt.
What happened?
Hale threatened to expose her role and claim she acted alone.
He also reminded her Moretti Capital had invested.
If scandal broke, Vincent’s company would lose money.
She told herself continuing protected everyone.
Classic self-deception.
Then:
“Why was Eli involved?”
“He saw me.”
“What did you tell Hale?”
“That a child behind the clinic was watching.”
“Did you ask him to hurt Eli?”
“No.”
Investigators found no evidence of physical threat plan.
Good.
Then:
“Why did you know his name?”
“Hale had security identify him through outreach staff.”
That was privacy abuse.
Then Camille looked directly at camera.
“I am sorry.”
Vincent did not respond.
Then:
“I know that means nothing.”
“It means something.”
She looked surprised.
“It does not undo anything.”
Specific.
Then:
“Does Lila want to see me?”
“No.”
At least not now.
“Did she say that?”
“Yes.”
Then Camille cried harder.
Vincent felt pity.
He hated that.
Pity is not acquittal.
Then the legal case.
Camille ultimately faced serious child-harm charges, conspiracy, fraud-related counts, and unlawful administration of a toxic substance.
Hale faced more:
medical fraud,
research misconduct,
evidence tampering,
child endangerment,
conspiracy,
false statements to investors.
No attempted murder unless evidence of lethal intent.
The prosecutors did not overcharge publicly.
Then Hale’s plea? Maybe later.
First, medical recovery.
Month one:
Lila could identify doorways.
Could read giant black letters at close range under high contrast.
Color remained poor.
Central blur persisted.
She hated adults celebrating every gain.
“Stop clapping.”
Vincent stopped.
Good.
Recovery became work:
vision therapy.
occupational therapy.
school.
Not miracle montage.
Then one morning Lila asked:
“What does Camille look like?”
Vincent froze.
She remembered less because vision had faded gradually.
“Do you want a picture?”
“No.”
“Okay.”
Then:
“Was she pretty?”
“Yes.”
“Are pretty people bad?”
“No.”
Good question.
“Bad people pretty?”
“People can look any way and do harmful things.”
Then:
“Was she bad?”
Vincent thought.
“She did something very harmful to you.”
Not total label.
Lila:
“Did she love me?”
“I think she did.”
“How can both?”
Vincent had no clean answer.
“Sometimes people love someone and still make choices that are unsafe or selfish. Love is not the same as safety.”
That sentence became important.
Then Sofia, Lila’s late mother.
Vincent worried Lila would idealize her in contrast.
He showed ordinary stories.
Sofia hated mornings.
burned toast.
once forgot preschool pickup because she wrote wrong time.
Dead mothers can remain human.
Then financial conspiracy.
Moretti Capital’s investment committee had relied on Michael Arden and Camille’s representations.
Independent board found no widespread plot.
One conflict.
One failure.
Michael lost executive role for nondisclosure and weak due diligence, but no criminal charges absent evidence he knew the child was being harmed.
He returned money from bonus tied to NeuroVista deal under settlement.
No invented mastermind.
Then NeuroVista.
Investors withdrew.
company entered bankruptcy.
research shut down.
patient data preserved for regulators.
No drug magically buried.
The scientific work itself was reviewed separately from fraud.
Some underlying research had legitimate value.
Hale’s misconduct contaminated trust, not every scientist.
Then one junior researcher, Dr. Mina Shah, came forward.
She had questioned why Lila’s case lacked ethics review.
Hale told her compassionate-use paperwork was being handled privately.
She accepted.
Later, when she saw decline charts, she raised concern again.
Hale removed her from project.
She did not go to regulators.
Why?
Visa status.
career fear.
belief someone senior would handle.
Another person who waited.
Not villain.
Not hero.
She later testified.
Then Vincent’s own house.
He reviewed staff structures.
Camille had been allowed to override kitchen protocols because she was family.
No one questioned unlabeled drops because:
Mrs. Moretti said vitamins.
New rule:
no unlabeled medications or supplements administered to any child.
Medication list shared with pediatrician.
Staff can report concerns outside chain.
Sounds obvious.
Wasn’t.
Then Frank asked:
“Are we turning the mansion into a hospital?”
“No.”
“Then how much protocol?”
“Enough that ‘family’ isn’t an exemption from safety.”
Good.
Then Lila wanted to go home.
Dr. Lin cleared.
Child-safety team inspected.
Camille barred by court order.
Kitchen cleared.
medications audited.
No reason to keep child hospitalized.
The first breakfast back terrified Vincent.
Hospital oatmeal had felt safe because strangers made it.
Home toast felt dangerous.
Lila noticed.
“Daddy.”
“Yes?”
“You’re staring at my eggs.”
“I know.”
“They’re eggs.”
“I know.”
Then:
“Did Rosa make them?”
“Yes.”
“Did you watch?”
He had.
Lila sighed.
“You’re weird.”
Good.
He laughed.
Then stopped watching every bite.
Slowly.
Because recovery from betrayal can become another form of surveillance if you are not careful.
Lila deserved breakfast, not a crime scene.
After Camille’s plea discussions began, one family member called Vincent.
His aunt Francesca.
“She made a terrible mistake.”
“Yes.”
“She was manipulated by a doctor.”
“Yes.”
“So you’ll ask for mercy.”
Vincent looked at the phone.
“No.”
“Victor—” She used wrong? Let's correct mentally. Vincent.
“Vincent, she is your wife.”
“She harmed Lila.”
“She loved her.”
“Those are not opposites.”
Francesca went silent.
Then:
“You’re destroying the family.”
Vincent almost laughed.
Family had become the word people used when they wanted consequences reassigned.
He answered:
“The prosecutor decides charges. The judge decides sentence. I will provide truthful information if asked.”
No private revenge.
No private rescue.
Then Camille’s parents requested access to Lila.
They had known nothing.
Lila loved them.
The child-safety team considered.
Contact with grandparents did not equal contact with Camille.
Eventually supervised video allowed.
Lila cried when she saw Camille’s mother.
“Grandma Anne.”
Anne cried too.
Then:
“I’m sorry.”
Lila asked:
“Did you know?”
“No.”
She believed.
Relationship preserved carefully.
Children should not lose every connection around a perpetrator automatically.
Then Vincent had to accept something harder.
Anne still loved Camille.
Of course.
She visited her.
Paid legal fees.
Believed she should be punished but not abandoned.
Vincent initially treated that as disloyalty to Lila.
Lila’s therapist corrected:
“Adults can maintain separate relationships as long as boundaries are safe.”
Again:
love not zero-sum.
Then breakfast became part of therapy.
Lila chose to make pancakes.
Rosa supervised stove.
Vincent was banned from hovering.
He sat across kitchen pretending to read.
Lila noticed.
“You’re still watching.”
“I’m looking at the newspaper.”
“Upside down.”
He turned it.
Rosa laughed.
Then Lila poured batter.
A little spilled.
No one panicked.
She ate one pancake.
Then another.
No hidden drops.
No forensic bag.
Just breakfast.
That ordinary scene mattered more than any courtroom statement.
One more boundary changed after Lila came home.
Vincent removed Camille’s name from every school, clinic, and household authorization form.
Not erased from history.
Removed from current authority.
Lila noticed.
“Does that mean she wasn’t family?”
“No.”
“Then why take her name off?”
“Because being family and being allowed to make decisions are different things.”
Lila considered.
That answer would follow both of them for years.
Love could remain a fact.
May you like
Authority had to be earned, limited, and sometimes revoked.
That difference mattered more than another promise ever could.
