But why send a drawing by a little girl? What was she trying to say? She examined the drawing again, the blue shirt, the photos Carlos had shown her. Gonzalo always wore blue shirts. Salomé had drawn what she saw that night. At three years old, she had created the evidence that could save her father, and someone had kept it all this time. Dolores needed to confirm that the drawing was authentic. She contacted an old friend, Patricia Méndez, a forensic psychologist with 30 years of experience in childhood trauma cases.
They met at Patricia’s office the next day. Time was running out. Less than 40 hours remained. Patricia examined the drawing with a magnifying glass, taking notes. The strokes are consistent with a child between three and four years old, she said. The pressure of the crayon, the shapes of the figures, the limited perspective. This drawing is authentic. Dolores, a young child, made it. Could it represent real trauma? Undoubtedly, children who witness traumatic events often process them through art.
This drawing shows a violent scene, one figure on the ground, another standing in a dominant position. The use of red here indicated stains on the lying figure. It shows that the child understood there was blood, and the man in the blue shirt is the most significant detail. Traumatized children remember specific elements: colors, smells, sounds. If the girl drew a blue shirt, it’s because the real aggressor wore a blue shirt. That’s a sensory memory, not an invention.
Dolores showed the photographs of Gonzalo that Carlos had collected. In every single one, without exception, he was wearing shades of blue. Ramiro Fuentes always wore dark colors, Dolores said. Black, gray, brown, never blue. Patricia nodded. If you can prove that the girl drew this days after the event, you have psychological evidence that she saw someone other than her father commit the crime. It’s not legal proof on its own, but combined with other elements, it can reopen the case. Exactly. Dolores carefully put the drawing away.
She had a piece of the puzzle, but she needed more. She needed to find Martín. Carlos arrived that night with more information. He had investigated Sara Fuentes’s past and found something crucial. Sara had a close friend, Beatriz Sánchez. They had known each other since college. According to phone records I was able to obtain, Sara spoke with Beatriz the night before she died. A 40-minute call. Beatriz Sánchez, a relative of Aurelio, her cousin, but they hadn’t spoken in years. There had been a family fight a while back.
Beatriz lives on the outskirts of the city. She’s a retired nurse. Dolores visited Beatriz that same afternoon. She was a 60-year-old woman who lived alone with three cats and memories of better times. Sara called me that night, Beatriz confirmed. She was scared. She told me she’d discovered something about Gonzalo, Ramiro’s brother, fraud involving their parents’ will. What else did she say? That Gonzalo had been harassing her since before the wedding. Ramiro never knew. Sara didn’t want to cause problems between the siblings, but in recent months Gonzalo had become more aggressive.
He threatened her if she didn’t keep quiet about the will. Why didn’t she ever report this to the police? Beatriz lowered her gaze. My cousin Aurelio visited me two days after Sara’s death. He told me that if I opened my mouth, he would investigate my taxes, find irregularities I didn’t even know about. He said he could destroy my life with one phone call. I was afraid, Dolores. I was afraid and I kept quiet. And I’ve lived with that guilt for five years. Would you be willing to testify now?
continued on next page
For complete cooking times, go to the next page or click the Open button (>), and don't forget to SHARE with your Facebook friends.
