control freak who would insist on being present during my conversation with his client. I looked at McBride and then back at Jonathan.
âSure,â I said with a smile. âLetâs go to the living room, Mr. McBride. We can talk there.â
***
âNot at all?â I asked him.
He vigorously shook his head. âNever, Miss Gold. Not with Sally. Not with my first two wives, and you certainly donât have to rely on my word for it. Iâll be happy to give you their names and telephone numbers. Talk to them directly. Confirm it for yourself.â He stood up and walked over to the fireplace. Turning to me with a serious expression, he said, âI absolutely, categorically deny the charge. I have never in my life struck a woman in anger.â
âYou say ânever in anger,ââ I responded, pressing on. âBut you did engage in bondage fantasies with Sally, correct?â
âGood Lord,â he mumbled, his face reddening. âYes, but surely nothing like that. Moreover, it was only once, early in the marriage. She asked me to, uh, to tie her up. I did, and we, ahem, had relations. But that was it. Only that one time.â
âMaybe with her, but she wasnât the only one, correct?â
He leaned back against the mantel and stared at the ceiling. I waited. After a moment, he took a deep breath, sighed, and looked at me. âIâve been with other women, Rachelâdo you mind if I call you Rachel? Many women. Before my marriage to Sally, after the marriage ended, and, well, during the marriage, too. Unhappily, our marital relationship soured quickly. All sexual relations had terminated by the end of the first six months of marriage.â
He paused, studying the carpet at his feet. âAs for other female companions,â he continued, still looking down, âoccasionally one would express a desire to engage in, shall we say, an unconventional procedure. I will admit that I acquiesced in some such requests, but I can assure you that I am not aââhe paused, searching for the correct wordââa devotee of bondage.â
It was, I had to admit, a credible performance. But then again, I reminded myself, lawyers are paid to sound credible. Thatâs what we do for a living. We manipulate judges, lawyers, people in general, clientsâespecially clients. The best lawyers are masters of manipulation, with skills more akin to those of sorcerers. Surely Neville McBrideâmanaging partner of Tully, Crane & Leonard and a man who had parlayed his mastery of the intricacies of the Internal Revenue Code and his extraordinary contacts within the upper echelon of St. Louis into a flourishing limited partnerships practiceâhad to be included on any list of the best.
All of which made this discussion even more awkward, given the subject matter and the disparity in our ages. It was like interrogating Walter Cronkite on his favorite masturbation technique.
Speaking of which, I had to concede, as I studied Neville McBride standing by the fireplace, that the image of him hunched naked over the exposed backside of a bound and gagged Sally Wade, his eyes straining, breath rasping, sweat dripping from his face as, in Bennyâs coarse metaphor, he furiously choked his chickenâwell, it was an image so implausible that it seemed preposterous. But then again, given some of the scenarios in my nastier divorce cases, what seemed preposterous often proved genuine.
Leaning back on the couch, I decided to try another approach. âWhen did you last see Sally?â
He squinted, trying to remember. âAbout two months ago, in a meeting arranged by our respective divorce attorneys.â
âHow did it go?â
He seemed to contemplate the question. âShe was cool but civil. The meeting lasted an hour and then I left.â
I nodded. âAnd itâs your position that you didnât see her after that?â
âItâs not simply
Michael Bracken, Heidi Champa, Mary Borselino