I answered, “She is my younger sister and the only person in my family whose judgment I consistently trusted without hesitation.”
The next questions focused on timeline reconstruction. Messages she sent, symptoms she described, and changes she noticed in her financial and medical systems.
I stated everything clearly without exaggeration.
When asked when I first suspected danger, I said, “When her written notes began contradicting the official records she was receiving about her own life.”
The defense attempted objections regarding interpretation.
The judge allowed the testimony to continue because it aligned with authenticated evidence already presented.
During cross examination, the defense tried to frame my testimony as emotionally influenced perception.
The attorney asked, “Is it possible that grief has altered your interpretation of past interactions.”
I replied, “Grief does not generate digital access logs or financial routing patterns.”
That answer ended the line of questioning for that segment.
The final forensic testimony came from a digital reconstruction specialist.