Chapter 4 - THE NIGHT THOMAS DIED
Investigators reconstructed Thomas’s final night minute by minute because intent would never be proven by one dramatic confession; it would be inferred from devices, medication records, security footage, messages, and the choices Marcus and Lydia made before and after the death.
10:36 p.m.
Thomas records IF I DIE TONIGHT.
10:51.
He texts Samuel:
Lydia brought medication Patel did not order. I kept one. Marcus coming.
11:08.
Samuel replies:
Do not take anything. Call me if you feel unsafe.
Thomas:
I will.
11:42.
Lydia enters bedroom with folder.
11:54.
Marcus arrives.
11:58.
A voice memo begins accidentally on Thomas’s phone? But phone with Samuel already? Contradiction. Thomas had given phone three days earlier per prior chapter but video recorded evening before death on phone. Let's adjust mentally: he gave phone to Samuel morning before will reading? Actually death weeks before, Samuel has it. Thomas could have delivered phone via courier earlier? Need continuity. Better say backup old phone remained hidden and was collected after death by Samuel from safe location. But ch2 says Thomas gave it three days before death. Contradiction. We need fix text later globally. We'll say he gave Samuel primary old phone? Yet video night before impossible. We'll correct ch2 in file after complete: Samuel received phone via secure courier morning after death? Can't. Let's revise conceptual: Thomas hid phone in locked study safe with instructions to Samuel; Samuel retrieved after death before family knew. In chapter1 family told phone missing. Let's later replace ch2 lines. Continue.
At 11:58, the old phone’s audio recorder activates when Thomas presses side shortcut.
Audio quality poor.
Voices.
Thomas:
“I’m not signing that.”
Marcus:
“You already promised me control.”
Thomas:
“No. I promised you a chance to earn it.”
Lydia:
“Thomas, you need to rest.”
Thomas:
“You need to leave.”
Then movement.
Door.
Lydia exits at 12:03.
Marcus remains.
Audio:
Marcus:
“You’re giving Evelyn half because you feel guilty.”
Thomas:
“I’m giving my children what I believe is fair.”
Marcus:
“She doesn’t even work for the company.”
Thomas:
“That’s why she may be the only one who understands ownership isn’t entitlement.”
Silence.
Marcus:
“You always choose her.”
Thomas:
“I chose accountability.”
At 12:17 Marcus exits with folder.
At 12:28 returns with mug.
Audio resumes faintly.
Marcus:
“Drink this.”
Thomas:
“No.”
Marcus:
“It’s tea.”
Thomas:
“I said no.”
Then louder movement.
Glass? Cup.
Thomas coughing.
Marcus:
“Stop being dramatic.”
The audio ends at 12:34.
Security shows Marcus leaves bedroom at 12:41.
He remains in mansion.
At 12:52, Thomas’s smartwatch records elevated heart rate.
1:04, abnormal rhythm.
1:18, sharp decline.
1:26, Marcus’s car leaves.
No 911.
No call to nurse.
No call to Samuel.
At 6:20, housekeeper finds Thomas dead.
Marcus returned at 6:50 after being called.
He acted shocked.
Evelyn arrived 7:30.
Lydia pronounced? Doctor. Lydia came 7:10 and told EMT Thomas had advanced heart disease.
No one suspected.
The original autopsy was limited because natural death plausible.
Now audio changed everything.
Was the tea drugged?
No cup.
Marcus had placed mug in dishwasher? Security showed him in kitchen after leaving room at 12:44.
At 12:47 dishwasher started.
That behavior looked deliberate.
Marcus’s defense:
He made tea.
Thomas drank voluntarily.
Dishwasher routine.
He stayed because father was upset.
He did not notice medical crisis.
Could he know sedative present?
Messages suggested yes.
Lydia faced charges too.
She supplied medication without order.
Helped conceal.
Did she intend death?
Prosecutors separated levels.
Lydia said Marcus told her he only wanted Thomas calm enough to discuss estate.
She knew sedative unauthorized.
She thought dose small.
She left before ingestion.
Then she received text at 12:43:
Marcus:
He finally stopped fighting.
Lydia:
Sleeping?
Marcus:
Yes.
Lydia:
Check breathing.
Marcus did not reply.
At 1:27:
Marcus:
Going home.
Lydia:
He okay?
No reply.
At 6:41:
Marcus:
Dad’s dead.
Lydia:
What?
Then:
Delete our messages.
There.
Obstruction.
Intent to conceal relationship and medication.
Still homicide classification.
Prosecutors charged Marcus with manslaughter? Maybe depraved indifference? Let's keep fictional general: homicide charge based on administering unauthorized sedative and failing to seek aid, plus fraud, forgery, obstruction. Lydia charged as accomplice to drugging and fraud, but lower homicide-related count if she supplied knowing risk.
Evelyn attended probable cause hearing.
Marcus looked smaller.
No banquet table.
No cheering cousins.
Vanessa sat behind him initially.
Then she learned affair with Lydia predated Sophie? Wait Sophie from previous story; no. Here wife Vanessa. Lydia affair. Vanessa confronted.
She filed for divorce.
She also became a witness.
What did she know?
Marcus came home around 1:45 that night.
He showered.
Put clothes in washer.
Vanessa asked why.
He said Thomas spilled tea on him.
Then at 6:30 call came.
Marcus acted shocked.
Vanessa remembered his shoes were wet? Not relevant.
She also remembered he burned a folder in fireplace next morning after returning from house.
At the time, she thought medical paperwork.
Now suspicious.
Investigators searched fireplace ash? Weeks later gone.
No.
But security camera at home showed Marcus carrying a folder into den at 8:12 a.m. and leaving without it.
Supportive.
Vanessa admitted she knew about forged will?
She knew Marcus expected to inherit all.
She did not know it was forged until after Thomas died? Maybe Marcus told her Thomas had signed.
She believed.
At will reading she participated in humiliating Evelyn because she believed money was theirs.
Still cruel.
Not conspiracy necessarily.
Cousins who laughed now distanced.
Evelyn refused calls.
Not yet.
She focused on probate.
Court invalidated forged will provisionally.
Original will admitted pending final challenge.
Marcus’s inheritance subject to forfeiture if convicted of estate fraud or homicide? Slayer statute may apply for homicide. If he caused death, cannot inherit.
That became motive in reverse.
Marcus wanted more.
Could lose all.
Samuel told Evelyn:
“Your father anticipated document fraud. He did not anticipate this.”
Evelyn looked at original will.
She did not feel victorious.
If Marcus was disqualified, his share might pass to descendants? He had none. Then trust? Thomas’s will had contingent clause directing forfeited share to charitable trust and Evelyn? Let's make half to family foundation, half to Evelyn, to avoid seeming she benefits too much? Better all forfeited share to Thomas Hart Foundation, not Evelyn, to remove incentive. Thomas cleverly specified no sibling windfall.
Evelyn smiled sadly.
Even there, Thomas tried to prevent greed.
Marcus’s misconduct would not make Evelyn richer.
Good.
The case became about truth.
May you like
Not inheritance rivalry.
Exactly as Thomas intended.
