Anonymous Tip: Full Conspiracy

A Review Series of Anonymous Tip, by Michael Farris

Pp. 83-84

So, let’s rehash the conspiracy so far. Donna the social worker falsified her report to state that she found bruises on four-year-old Casey when in fact she did not. Donna spoke with Blackburn, her supervisor, before doing this, and got his go-ahead to falsify the documents and lie in court. Given that Peter found mention of bruises in Rita’s report as well, this second social worker, who was also on the scene, must be in on the secret as well. That makes three. Gail the prosecutor appears to be completely in the dark, so that leaves it at three.

Today a fourth individual is added to the conspiracy.

It was their usual meeting place for such a rendezvous—the Ram’s Head Tavern just south of the intersection of 57th and Regal. It was a pickup truck-type of tavern and Randall’s BMW and Gerald’s Celica were conspicuous when they arrived.

The tavern was located on the far south side of Spokane, outside the city limits. Close by were a conglomeration of radio and TV towers, just on the edge of the metropolitan area and less than five miles from where serious agricultural operations began.

I’ll leave it to our Spokane expert to discuss the location, and to readers who know about cars than I to guess at what Randall’s BMW and Gerald’s Celica say about them. But wait! Randall and Gerald? Who are these people?!

Randall arrived first and waited in the corner with a Coors while Clint Black serenaded the patrons from an old jukebox. A readheaded waitress in her late thirties came by three times in ten minutes. Randall glanced up at her but wasn’t interested in what she was selling. The years had not been kind to her.

So, usually waitresses are selling food. Like, there’s a menu. And actually, coming by three times in ten minutes is considered good service, not . . . prostitution? As for the bit about the years not being kind to her, normally I’d see that as common cliche, but in the hands of Farris and in a moralizing novel like this one, there are undertones. And it’s yucky. Also, she’s in her late thirties? That is not that old!

I think Farris is trying to underline how seedy this place, but he’s doing it in a way that makes me cringe not at the location but at him.

Gerald finally arrived and ordered a Coors Light and ignored Lila’s efforts to gain attention.

Suddenly she has a name? I mean, I’m assuming we’re still talking about the redheaded waitress! It’s a bit jarring to suddenly throw a name in like that, after leaving her unnamed the paragraph before. But seriously? Going to a restaurant and then ignoring the waitress’s attempt to get your attention is really really rude. Waitresses try to get your attention to sell you food.

Gah! Farris! Stop it!

They immediately got to work.

“I understand that you have another special case for me,” Randall said.

Gerald nodded, sipping his beer. “It’s very important to us.”

“They always are,” Randall replied.

Even though these are new names, and Farris is clearly at pains to conceal who these people are at the moment, it’s safe to assume that Gerald is with the CPS office and needs something from Randall vis a vis the Landis case.

I have to say, I’m still not sure what makes the Landis case so very important to the Spokane CPS. Originally, Donna was angry that Gwen had called her a “witch” and a “nazi” and wanted to falsify her report to get back at her. Blackburn, her supervisor, signed on out of concern that Gwen might sue them for pushing their way in and strip-searching Casey. But if Gwen might have sued over that, what’s to stop her from suing over, well, this?

Later, when speaking with her rich lawyer-to-be boyfriend, Stephen, Donna espoused different motivations, perhaps in an effort to justify her actions to herself—she told him that she falsified her report because Gwen admitted to spanking and she believes all spanking is abuse. But if this is the case, and the Spokane CPS office is pursuing the case against Gwen in an effort to stop parents from spanking, they’re acting outside of the law (spanking, even with an implement, was perfectly legal in Washington) and they’re going to have a huge number of parents to go after when they’re through with Gwen, as spanking (especially at the time) was common.

I guess what I’m trying to say is, I still don’t have a handle on the motivations or end game for the CPS conspiracy Farris has created for our readerly consumption.

Anyway, back to the conversation:

“Who are we dealing with?”

“The mother’s name is Gwen Landis; her daughter is Casey, age four. She’s accused of spanking the girl and leaving bruises. The mother admits spankings with a wooden implement, but denies bruises,” Gerald said.

“You know how I feel about parents who hit their children,” Randall replied, shaking his head in disgust.

“That’s why we come to you. We know you are on our team . . . and are reasonably willing to do what it takes to advance the cause of children,” Gerald replied.

Remember this, because this is where it should have ended.

“If we were in Seattle or Portland or San Francisco , we could do this openly. Most juvenile judges there share our convictions. But these Spokane judges live too close to the boonies. Bruises are their threshold. No bruises, no action.”

Randall nodded in agreement.

Do what openly, exactly? Spanking (even with an implement) was (and is) legal in Oregon and California too. Judges interpret and enforce the law, they don’t make it up or throw it out. Bruises are just as much the threshold in Seattle, Portland, and San Francisco as they are in Spokane.

And so I’m still wondering—do what openly? Prosecute a family based only on the fact that they spank? Or frame a family? Presumably the former, but this passage is written in a way that leaves this really unclear.

“Well, what do I need to do?”

“You are going to interview both mother and child on Thursday. We want the report to be professional, but spun in such a way that these yokel judges will bite.”

“No problem. I can spin with the best of them. You understand I must tell the truth, but whenever our arrangement is in place I am willing to tell it creatively.”

And again, this is where it should end. But it doesn’t.

Gerald pulled the envelope out of his inner jacket pocked and laid it on the table. “I need the report by ten Friday morning.”

“It’s half-written already,” Randall said with a laugh. “I’ll bill you for the official fee in due course.”

Gerald stood. “You’ll take care of the tab for the beer?”

“It’s the least I can do to show my gratitude,” Randall replied, raising his glass to Blackburn.

Gerald Blackburn, “Top Child Advocate of 1993,” left quietly, got into his Celica and headed south. Randall McGuire, Ph.D., sat at the table for another ten minutes, counted twenty one-hundred dollar bills in the envelope, then got in his BMW and headed for his spacious home on the seventh hole of the Manito Country Club, only ten minutes but a world away from the Ram’s Head.

And there we have their names! The suspense was killing me! /sarcasm. Seriously, I’ll leave it to my readers who write fiction to judge how well Farris pulled off this literary device. And honestly, Farris set this up a long time ago when he pointedly didn’t give Blackburn a first name (which I remarked on at the time, if I may add).

Suffice it to say, Gerald is Gerald Blackburn, Donna’s supervisor, and Randall is Randall McGuire, the psychologist Casey and Gwen will be evaluated by on Thursday (we are not given a time of day for this rendezvous, but it presumably takes place either Tuesday evening or sometime Wednesday).

And did you catch that Gerald (Blackburn) just gave Randall (McGuire) a bribe?! Frankly, this conspiracy theory is becoming only more difficult to believe as time goes by. This is the sort of thing everyone involved would lose their livelihoods over.

Did you notice the two places where I said the conversation should have stopped there? If Randall (McGuire) is as opposed to corporal punishment as is suggested, and if all Gerald (Blackburn) wants is psychologist reports that portray the negative impact of spanking on Casey and probe into Gwen’s past to determine why she feels the need to use corporal punishment on her child, and if Randall (McGuire) is presumably already going to be paid for his services as a psychologist appointed by the court and as an expert witness in the case, why the need for a bribe?

Honestly, the bribe takes a (mostly) believable exchange between two individuals and turns them both into textbook villains.

And where is this money coming from, I have to ask? CPS is notoriously underfunded. I suppose we’ll probably find out the answer to that question by the end of the book, when everything comes out (as it surely will).

There’s also an awful lot of speaking derisively of “yokels” and “boonies.” While it’s a touch over the top, this may be the most realistic thing in the entire passage.