Latest / Dark Psychology: The Control Game / He Lived Next Door: A Three-Year Laboratory of Quiet Theft

Transcript

He Lived Next Door: A Three-Year Laboratory of Quiet Theft · Dark Psychology: The Control Game

• 0:03
  Speaker 1: At six o four in the morning on May ninth,
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: twenty nineteen, a jogger named Pamela Coleman stopped at a
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: bench in Brearton Park and found a yellow sharp's container
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: sitting in the open air. She assumed it was medical
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: waste left by accident. Then she looked inside seventeen signed
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: surgical consent forms stacked in order, each bearing the name
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: Pamela Sawyer. Someone had put them there on purpose. The
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: container did not fall off a truck. It did not
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: blow in from the street. According to investigators, a man
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: named Curtis Webb had carried it to that bench and
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: set it down when something spooped him mid route. Webb
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: worked a second job for a board certified plastic surgeon
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: named Bruce Schultz, and those seventeen consent forms represented three
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: years of procedures performed on a fifty four year old
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: retired librarian who, by the time that container hit the
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: morning air, had spent two hundred twelve thousand dollars under
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: Schultz's care and had taken out a forty thousand dollars
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: loan against her home. She described him at the start
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: as the most thorough doctor she had ever seen. That
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: phrase will mean something different before this story is over.
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: Pamela Sawyer lived in a modest house on Lynden Court
• 1:23
  Speaker 1: in Delwood. She had spent decades as a public librarian,
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: the kind of work that rewards patience and precision and
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: genuine care for other people. She retired in her early fifties,
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: not wealthy, but stable, with a settlement from a minor
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: accident that had left a small scar on her forearm.
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: The scar was manageable. It bothered her less than the
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: idea that it might not heal cleanly on its own.
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: That is why in October twenty fifteen she accepted a
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: referral to Bruce Schultz. Her daughter, Rene, who lived in Portland,
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: would later remember her mother as someone who read everything
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: twice before signing it, and asked questions until she understood
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: the answer. Pamela was not impulsive. She was not easily impressed.
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: She had a standing Tuesday breakfast at the Birchwood Cafe,
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: the same order every week, the same table, when she
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: could get it. Routine was not a comfort for her,
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: it was of value. The ninety minute initial consultation with
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: Schultz was by any measure, unusual. Most cosmetic consultations for
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: a minor scar revision run twenty to thirty minutes. Schultz
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: spent an hour and a half with Pamela. He reviewed
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: her medical history in detail. He asked about her sleep,
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: her stress levels, her diet. According to Pamela's later account
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: to investigators, he spoke carefully and listened without interrupting. When
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: the appointment ended, she drove home feeling for the first
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: time in years, genuinely heard by a physician. Schultz called
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: her that same evening. He said he had been thinking
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: about her case. He had a few follow up questions.
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: The call lasted nearly half an hour. Pamela mentioned the
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: call to Renee. She said it approvingly. She said he
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: actually called. The first procedure took place in February two
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: thousand sixteen, a minor scar revision, exactly what she had
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: come in for. The result was clean. The recovery was
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: unremarkable by every visible measure. The relationship between patient and
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: surgeon was exactly what it appeared to be. It would
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: not stay that way. By mid two thousand seventeen, Donna Reys,
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: a waitress at the Birchwood Cafe who had known Pamela
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: for years, noticed something she could not quite name. Pamela
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: still came in on Tuesdays. She still ordered the same thing,
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: but she seemed, in Rays's word to investigators, somewhere else, quieter,
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: less likely to make eye contact. When Rays asked how
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: she was doing, Pamela gave answers that sounded rehearsed. Around
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: the same time, Pamela stopped talking to Renee about her procedures,
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: not sharply, not with any single moment of refusal, She
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: just stopped. When Renee asked, Pamela said everything was fine
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: and changed the subject. She had also stopped seeing her
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: primary care physician. According to investigators, Schultz had suggested at
• 4:25
  Speaker 1: some point that her PCP's involvement might complicate her treatment continuity.
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: Pamela accepted the suggestion without apparent resistance. What Pamela did
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: not know, what she could not have known, according to
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: the prosecution, was that in November two thousand sixteen, a
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: secondary insurance policy had been enrolled in her name. The
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: enrollment originated from an IP address inside Schultz's office. The
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: premiums were set to auto draft from an account linked
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: to her information. Pamela had not applied for the policy.
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: She had not authorized it. The his signature on the
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: enrollment form was hers. The handwriting on a separate authorization
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: identifier was not. For two years, money moved in directions
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: Pamela had never approved. The question investigators would spend months
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: trying to answer was not simply what Schultz had taken.
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: It was how he had built the conditions in which
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: taking it was possible. And the answer to that question
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: was already visible in pieces scattered across billing records, phone logs,
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: and the memory of a Tuesday waitress who noticed a
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: woman drifting away from herself. The billing records arrived on
• 5:36
  Speaker 1: Robert Chu's desk in May two thousand nineteen. He had
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: been asked to look at one account. What he found
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: inside it it did not belong to one account. Pamela
• 5:47
  Speaker 1: Sawyer had paid two hundred twelve thousand dollars in surgical
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: costs between two thousy sixteen and two thousand eighteen. That
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: number alone was striking, but the structure beneath it was
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: stranger than the number. Procedures were billed in sequences that
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: Chew recognized after three days of cross referencing as a
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: kind of latter. A minor revision would reveal a secondary concern.
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: The secondary concern would require a corrective step. The corrective
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: step would uncover a third complication. Each procedure generated the
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: clinical rationale for the next Chu had audited medical practices
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: for eleven years. He had never seen a patient file
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: that moved this cleanly from problem to solution to new
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: problem seventeen times in a row. He pulled the phone
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: records next. What came back from the subpoena stopped him
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: For two years. Bruce Schultz had called Pamela Sawyer approximately
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: four times per week in the evenings, for an average
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: of twenty two minutes per call. On the nights before
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: a scheduled procedure, the calls stretched past forty minutes. None
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: of those calls appeared anywhere in Pamela's clinical chart, not
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: a single one surgeon and a patient, hundreds of undocumented conversations,
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: and on paper, they barely existed to each other. That
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: was the first image that would not let go of
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: the investigation. The second arrived in July. Chew was running
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: a search through the practice's billing software looking for duplicate
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: codes when a name surfaced that had no business being
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: in Pamela's file cluster. Margaret Telford early sixties, a widow
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: also from Delwood. Her procedures ran from twenty twelve to
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: twenty fifteen, eleven surgeries. Chu pulled the full file and
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: set it beside Pamela's. The structure was identical. Small revision,
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: first secondary concern follows corrective step, new complication, a staircase
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: of procedures, each one medically justified by the step before it.
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: Margaret Telford's file ended in October two thousy fifteen. Pamela
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: Sawyer's first conc consultation with Schultz was that same month.
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: Chu sat with that alignment for a long time before
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: he wrote it in his report. But here's the thing
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: that the billing ladder alone could not explain. The money
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: Pamela had spent was her own, drawn from a settlement
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: and from investment accounts she had built over decades as
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: a librarian in Dellwood. By early two thy nineteen, those
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: sources were nearly exhausted. In February of that year, Pamela
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: had taken a forty thousand dollars home equity line of
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: credit on the Lynden Court house she had lived in
• 8:36
  Speaker 1: for over twenty years. The stated purpose on the application
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: was home renovations. No renovations were ever done. The house
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: was the last reservoir and it had been opened. Forensic
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: social worker Melissa Hunt interviewed Pamela in August two thousand nineteen,
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: three months after the Sharp's container had been found at
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: Brierton Park. Hunts written assessment described what she observed as
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: acquired self doubt consistent with prolonged gaslighting exposure. Pamela, she noted,
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: repeatedly prefaced statements about her own medical history with qualifiers.
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: I think if I remember correctly, he would know better
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: than I would. A woman who had spent thirty years
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: cataloging facts for other people could no longer trust her
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: own account of events she had lived through. Hunt's report
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: identified the evening phone calls as the mechanism not incidentally
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: therapeutic structurally therapeutic, designed in Hunt's reading, to keep Pamela's
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: frame of reference tethered to Schultz's version of her body
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: in her needs. The Sharp's container had been photographed and cataloged,
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: The insurance fraud was documented. The phone records ran to
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: hundreds of pages, and still the investigation had a problem
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: it could not solve from paper alone. Nothing in the
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: record showed the moment Pamela stopped trusting herself. That moment
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: had no timestamp, It left no document. What the investigation
• 10:04
  Speaker 1: had instead was a sequence of absences, the visits to
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: her primary care physician that stopped, the conversations with Renee
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: that trailed off, the Birchwood Cafe version of Pamela that
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: Donna Reis watched grow quieter across the span of a year.
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: These were not clues to a crime. They were the
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: residue of a process. Renee Sawyer had been the first
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: to feel the distance. Her mother had been open with her,
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: the way parents sometimes are with an adult child who
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: lives far away and cannot worry in person. Then sometime
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: in the middle of twenty seventeen, the openness closed. Renee
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: would ask how the recovery was going. Pamela would say fine.
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: Renee would ask which procedure. Pamela would say it was
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: nothing significant. Renee did not push. She told herself her
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: mother was a private person. She told herself that was
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: just how it was going. She was not wrong about
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: her mother. That was the part that made it so
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: hard to name. Later what the prosecution would eventually argue
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: and what forty one witnesses across nineteen trial days would
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: help to build was that the isolation had not happened
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: by accident. The primary care physician had been removed from
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: the picture. Renee had been gently redirected. The evening phone
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: calls had filled the space that other voices used to occupy.
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: Schultz had not locked Pamela in a room. He had
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: made himself the room. The enrollment of the secondary insurance
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: policy traced to his office IP address was the place
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: where persuasion became something else. The signature on the form
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: was Pamela's. The handwriting on the authorization identifier was not.
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: Pamela had not known the policy existed. The premiums were
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: drafting from her account while she was scheduling her fifteenth procedure,
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: believing she was managing her own care. When Melissa Hunt
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: asked Pamela in that August interview whether she had added
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: I ever felt pressured by Schultz, Pamela's answer was careful and specific.
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: She said she had always felt that he understood things
• 12:08
  Speaker 1: about her situation that she didn't fully understand herself. She
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: said that had felt like a gift. Hunt wrote that
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: sentence down and underlined it. Picture the initial consultation room
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: in October two thousand, fifteen ninety minutes Schultz calls that
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: same evening. By the following February, Pamela is on the
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: table for the first time. A minor scar revision, uncomplicated,
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: resolved cleanly. If you stop the story there you see
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: a competent surgeon with an attentive bedside manner, and a
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: patient who feels for the first time in a long time,
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: genuinely heard. That version of events is not false. That
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: is precisely the problem. Walk the same sequence forward with
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: what the billing records showed, and the picture changes shape.
• 12:56
  Speaker 1: The scar revision generates a follow up note about adjacent tissue.
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: The follow up generates a recommendation. The recommendation produces a
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: second procedure. The second procedure reveals a third concern. Seventeen times.
• 13:11
  Speaker 1: The prosecution's position was that the latter was not discovered,
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: it was built. Each small defect that emerged after a
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: procedure was, according to expert testimony and trial, consistent with
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: deliberate surgical variation rather than natural healing complexity. A very
• 13:28
  Speaker 1: small change in technique introduced that the margin of a
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: wound would reliably produce the condition that justified the next appointment.
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: The defense argued that Pamela had been an unusually difficult healer,
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: that the complications were genuine, that Schultz had simply been thorough,
• 13:46
  Speaker 1: and here is where the Margaret Telford file collapsed that argument.
• 13:50
  Speaker 1: Telford had also been an unusually difficult healer across eleven
• 13:54
  Speaker 1: procedures across three years in the same practice with the
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: same surgeon. Her complication had also resolved cleanly and then
• 14:02
  Speaker 1: generated new ones. Her file had also contained evening calls
• 14:06
  Speaker 1: not entered in the chart. Her account had also been
• 14:09
  Speaker 1: double billed through an insurance structure. She had not knowingly authorized.
• 14:14
  Speaker 1: Two unusually difficult healers, same town, sequential timelines, identical file architecture.
• 14:24
  Speaker 1: Telford had filed a complaint with the State Medical Board
• 14:27
  Speaker 1: in twenty sixteen. It had been rejected for insufficient documentation.
• 14:32
  Speaker 1: She had not known Pamela existed. Pamela had not known
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: Telford existed. They were, according to the prosecution chapters in
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: the same book written by the same hand filed separately,
• 14:44
  Speaker 1: discovered only because a disposal driver named Curtis Webb set
• 14:47
  Speaker 1: a yellow container down on a park bench and walked away.
• 14:51
  Speaker 1: In his twenty twenty four interview conducted after his appeal
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: was denied, Schultz described the evening calls as part of
• 14:59
  Speaker 1: his care philosophy. He said he believed in continuity. He
• 15:04
  Speaker 1: said Pamela had needed guidance. He used that word specifically, guidance,
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: not treatment, not care, guidance. He had built the conditions,
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: he had made himself the room, and for three years,
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: in the evenings, from his office or his car or
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: his home, he had called to make sure the room held.
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: The trial opened in March of twenty twenty one, nineteen days,
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: forty one witnesses, a forensic accountant, a forensic social worker,
• 15:34
  Speaker 1: a jogger who had stopped to stretch on a park
• 15:37
  Speaker 1: bench before the sun was fully up. And Pamela Sawyer herself,
• 15:41
  Speaker 1: who sat in that courtroom and described in measured sentences
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: what it had felt like to believe that her body
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: was failing her on its own. Schultz did not confess.
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: He maintained through every day of testimony that the procedures
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: had been medically indicated, that the complications were genuine, that
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: the evening calls were continuity of care, that Pamela had
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: been a patient who required more attention than most. The
• 16:08
  Speaker 1: jury deliberated and returned a verdict on nine of eleven
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: counts guilty insurance fraud, financial exploitation of a vulnerable adult,
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: unlawful practice. Procedures performed not because they were necessary, but
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: because they were profitable. The sentence was eight years in
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: state prison, restitution three hundred forty thousand dollars. It covered
• 16:31
  Speaker 1: Pamela's surgical costs, the heelock, and a portion of what
• 16:34
  Speaker 1: Margaret Telford had lost across her own eleven procedures years
• 16:38
  Speaker 1: earlier in the same chair. Schultz filed an appeal in
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty two, citing jura misconduct. The appeal was denied
• 16:46
  Speaker 1: in twenty twenty three. He had exhausted the standard routes.
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: Curtis Webb, the disposal driver who had set the yellow
• 16:54
  Speaker 1: container on that bench and walked away when he heard footsteps,
• 16:58
  Speaker 1: pleaded guilty to evidence tampering. He received probation. The container
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: and everything inside it had already been photographed by the
• 17:06
  Speaker 1: time investigators reached it. There is one detail worth pausing
• 17:10
  Speaker 1: on the consent forms in that container covered every procedure
• 17:14
  Speaker 1: from two thousand sixteen through two thousand eighteen seventeen forms
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: seventeen signatures. Schultz had kept them separate from the practice records.
• 17:25
  Speaker 1: According to the prosecution, he had maintained what amounted to
• 17:29
  Speaker 1: a parallel archive, and when he decided those documents needed
• 17:33
  Speaker 1: to disappear, he chose a method that required a second person,
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: a vehicle, and a park bench on a jogging trail
• 17:40
  Speaker 1: at dawn. That choice, the decision to remove rather than destroy,
• 17:45
  Speaker 1: was among the details that Robert Chu and the prosecution
• 17:49
  Speaker 1: team found most revealing. Documents shredded in an office leave nothing,
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: documents handed to a driver and transported create a chain.
• 17:59
  Speaker 1: The archive had been in an asset. Removing it had
• 18:02
  Speaker 1: been a risk. The decision to take that risk suggested
• 18:05
  Speaker 1: the documents had mattered to him in some way that
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: pure destruction would not have served. The prosecution did not
• 18:12
  Speaker 1: speculate publicly on why the jury did not need them too.
• 18:16
  Speaker 1: The physical record spoke. Pamela Sawyer sold the house on
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: Lynden Court in twenty twenty two. She moved to Portland
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: to be near Renee. She still has Tuesday breakfast, a
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: different cafe, the same order, that detail, the same order,
• 18:33
  Speaker 1: the same morning, a different room is the one that
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: stays because what Schultz had methodically taken apart was not
• 18:40
  Speaker 1: just her finances or her body. It was her sense
• 18:43
  Speaker 1: of her own perception, the quiet certainty that her body
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: could be trusted, that the people who told her she
• 18:50
  Speaker 1: was healing slowly were telling her the truth, that the
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: voice she heard most often in the evenings through a
• 18:57
  Speaker 1: phone pressed to her ear was the voice of some
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: one who wanted her well. Forensic social worker Melissa Hunt
• 19:03
  Speaker 1: had described it in twenty nineteen as acquired self doubt
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: consistent with prolonged gaslighting exposure. That phrase is clinical and correct,
• 19:14
  Speaker 1: and still does not entirely capture what it means to
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: have your grip on reality loosened incrementally by someone you
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: believed was tracking your recovery. Margaret Telford had tried to
• 19:25
  Speaker 1: name it in twenty sixteen, the state Medical Board had
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: rejected her complaint for insufficient documentation. She had not known
• 19:34
  Speaker 1: about Pamela, Pamela had not known about her. Each woman
• 19:38
  Speaker 1: had believed for years that her experience was singular, that
• 19:43
  Speaker 1: she had simply been unlucky, or difficult, or too anxious
• 19:47
  Speaker 1: about her own healing. That is the part of this
• 19:50
  Speaker 1: case that does not resolve with a verdict. The isolation
• 19:53
  Speaker 1: was the instrument, and the instrument worked precisely because each
• 19:57
  Speaker 1: woman was kept from knowing the other exist. In his
• 20:01
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty four interview after the appeal was denied, Schultz
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: was asked directly about the evening calls. He confirmed them.
• 20:09
  Speaker 1: He confirmed the deliberate sequencing of the procedures. He described
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: it all as care He called Pamela a woman who
• 20:17
  Speaker 1: needed to be guided. He said it without apparent awareness
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: of what that sentence revealed. He had not guided her
• 20:24
  Speaker 1: toward health. He had guided her toward dependency and then
• 20:28
  Speaker 1: build her for the distance. What Pamela rebuilt in Portland
• 20:32
  Speaker 1: near her daughter with a Tuesday breakfast at a different
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: cafe is not nothing. It is, in fact, the most
• 20:40
  Speaker 1: precise rebuttal available to the argument Schultz made in that interview.
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: She had not needed to be guided, She had needed
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: to be left alone. The bench in Briarden Park still stands.
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: The yellow container is in an evidence archive. Somewhere in
• 20:56
  Speaker 1: that archive, seventeen consent forms sit in a sealed Seventeen
• 21:01
  Speaker 1: signatures on procedures that should not have happened, documented by
• 21:05
  Speaker 1: the man who performed them. Carried to a park by
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: a man paid to make them disappear, and found by
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: a woman who stopped to stretch at six in the
• 21:14
  Speaker 1: morning and looked down at the wrong bench at exactly
• 21:17
  Speaker 1: the right time. The room Schultz built took three years
• 21:21
  Speaker 1: to construct. It took one jogger, one forensic accountant, and
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: one forensic social worker to dismantle, and it took Pamela
• 21:29
  Speaker 1: Sawyer the rest of it the time after the different
• 21:32
  Speaker 1: cafe the same order to find out what remained when
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: the walls came down. This show is made by Obomedia.