Chapter 6 - The Man Who Came Out of the Water
Detective Cross did not accept my new theory simply because it sounded convincing.
She asked where I heard it, and I told her Camille had repeated something Leo said.
"Then we need to preserve the source of that information," she replied. "Please don't question him further."
Camille had already arranged a follow-up with the child specialist.
Leo described two adults on a gray launch, one in a red coat, and another man who fell or jumped from the back as the boat approached the smaller vessel.
He could not say which adult controlled the movement.
He remembered the splash because he heard someone shout.
He remembered the smaller boat because its light flickered once before it went dark.
That account was frightening enough without anyone turning it into a polished crime scene.
Cross and her team compared the description with Freya's statement and the marine-security contractor's records.
A contractor named Derek Moss had been assigned to a late-night transfer near the Merrick estate.
His job report described a 'passenger recovery exercise.'
But there was no corresponding emergency-service record, training schedule, or safety report supporting a drill on that date.
When investigators contacted him, Derek admitted he had been in the water but claimed he slipped while moving between boats.
He had survived, climbed into the smaller vessel, and was treated for a shoulder injury.
The injury was documented at an urgent-care clinic the following day.
Derek said he did not know Nadia Voss and did not remember seeing a woman in a red coat.
The investigators were not obliged to believe his denial.
Nor were we entitled to declare it false without evidence.
For me, the central question had changed.
Leo had seen a man in the water.
If Derek was that man, what happened to the woman who had been aboard the launch?
The missing-person investigation could no longer be reduced to a drawing that might have shown a drowning.
It required a careful account of where each passenger went.
Julian's lawyers maintained that he had taken no part in harming Nadia and that speculation based on a child's memories had already caused the family serious damage.
They pointed to my online post as evidence of reckless behavior.
On that point, I could not disagree.
I had exposed details before asking whether the people most vulnerable to the consequences would consent.
Sarah advised me to admit the error plainly if questioned and focus on what I personally witnessed in the mansion foyer.
I did.
I remembered Julian's hand hovering over the drawing.
I remembered the accusation about the diamond.
I remembered his fear when the gray launch returned.
Those observations did not become less true because I'd made a mistake later.
Camille received temporary arrangements allowing her more regular contact with Leo while safety concerns were assessed.
There was no declaration that Julian had lost all parental rights.
The court and relevant agencies were considering evidence of Leo's needs, including the effect of repeated unexplained moves.
Julian was angry.
He sent his sister a letter accusing her of trying to take his son away.
Camille called him and said something that finally sounded like a boundary.
"I want Leo safe and loved. If you can provide that, prove it through the proper process instead of threatening everybody who asks questions."
She hung up before he answered.
That evening a sealed envelope arrived at the detective's office from Derek's attorney.
It contained a copy of an old invoice showing who had paid for the nighttime transfer.
The payment came not from Merrick Marine Holdings, but from a company Julian had once described as an independent security vendor.
The vendor's director was Julian's closest business associate, Raymond Crowe.
Raymond had been mentioned in the missing-person inquiry as one of the people whose invoices Nadia had challenged.
May you like
And on the back of the transfer invoice, in a hurried handwritten note, was the instruction:
MOVE THE WITNESS BEFORE SHE TALKS.
