2-3-4 Challenge Book Discussions #1 discussion

Did you initially believe the Fitzgerald company was responsible for LePere's diving sabotages as he suspected? What holes, if any, did you see in that theory?

I believed it could be possible. The only aspect I found a bit far fetched and led to any doubt in my mind was that given the time which had passed it would have been logical that had the Fitzgerald company been responsible they would have eliminated any evidence aboard the Teasdale, given the boat was reachable via diving.

That was my thinking, too, Angela. And, when I learned Grace had sold the company, it made no sense at all. The new owners wouldn't have even known about a crooked plan to sink the Teasdale.

I thought it was possible. And I think a company can still be legally bound to pay even if there's been a change in ownership so I didn't think that was a deterrant. I also didn't think the company would go to the trouble of eliminating any evidence of the wreck because they didn't have any reasonable reason to do so considering that there was only survivor and the ship went down in a big storm. LaPere himself didn't consider intentional sabotage as a possibility until LaPere put that idea into his head. Plus, the company trying to destroy a wreck sunk hundreds of feet down the lake would've only drawn attention, which would be contrary to the company's desire to keep it secret.

Oh, they'd still be legally bound but the new owners wouldn't have known of any threat of a potential suit or culpability. If the previous management had deliberately sunk that ship as Bridger suggested, they certainly wouldn't have disclosed that to the new owners. They had absolutely no reason to try to hide anything.