by Meg Cabot
Recorded by Anne Kelly (AK) for later comparison with stenographer’s transcript
Miriam Lowe, Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York
MH: Ms. Mackenzie, thank you so much for being here today. Ms. Mackenzie, Mrs. Lopez’s attorney and I have just been discussing the case of Ida Lopez with your supervisor, Ms. Jenkins, and there seems to be a disagreement that I hope you can settle, if you’d be amenable to that.
SH: Objection.
MH: Stuart, you can’t object. This is pretrial discovery, not the courtroom.
SH: Well, you didn’t listen last time I tried to interrupt.
MH: Maybe because you shouldn’t be interrupting.
SH: When it comes to the protection of my client, I most certainly will interrupt, as often as I deem necessary, if doing so will get us to the truth.
JV: Pardon me for interrupting, gentlemen. But don’t you two have the same client?
SH: You’d think so, wouldn’t you? We’re supposed to be working to get at the truth here, Mitch. For our client.
MH: But that’s what I’m trying to do. Get to the truth.
SH: By asking Ms. Mackenzie about a letter she can’t possibly remember writing?
MH: I am willing to give Ms. Mackenzie more credit than you are. I believe she is capable of remembering documents that she sent out under her own name. Most people are.
SH: Yes, but most people don’t, as Ms. Mackenzie does, have several hundred employees about whom she writes letters every day.
MH: She doesn’t write several hundred letters a day, however. Do you, Ms. Mackenzie?
KM: No.
JV: Don’t look at me, Stuart. I’m certainly not going to object.
SH: Mitch—
MH: Ms. Jenkins, do you maintain that Ms. Mackenzie writes several hundred letters a day?
AJ: No, certainly not. But I do maintain that the document in question might—
MH: Let’s just ask Ms. Mackenzie, shall we? Ms. Mackenzie, I’m going to ask you about a certain document that you allegedly wrote, and I want you to tell me what you can about it.
KM: Well, I’ll try.
MH: Great. The document in question is a letter of written warning that Ms. Jenkins alleges Ida Lopez received before her dismissal last week. Do you remember writing such a letter?
KM: I remember writing a rough draft of a warning letter to Mrs. Lopez after an incident that occurred prior to the one for which she was dismissed.
AJ: See? I told you!
JV: Excuse me, Ms. Jenkins. I believe, Ms. Mackenzie, you said you drafted such a letter?
KM: Yes. But I never finished it.
AJ: That’s a lie!
JV: Please, Ms. Jenkins. Mr. Hertzog, would you please control your client?
MH: Hey there, Amy. Simmer down.
SH: This is ridiculous! Ms. Jenkins is understandably upset. The letter in question was undoubtedly finished and sent, as we have the signed copy right here, initialed by Mrs. Lopez to indicate she received it—
IL: And I tell you, I didn’t sign any such letter!
KM: She’s right. Mrs. Lopez couldn’t have initialed the letter I was writing to her, because I never finished it. I got interrupted, and right after that, the T.O.D—I mean, Amy—called, and said I was to dis—
AJ: I did not!
KM: —miss Mrs. Lopez. Amy, what are you talking about? Yes, you did.
AJ: This is a complete fabrication, a campaign by an incompetent employee to cover her ass because SHE screwed up!
KM: What are you talking about? You told me—
AJ: She’s lying! Stuart, she’s obviously lying. How could she not be, when the very fact that the letter exists AND was initialed by Mrs. Lopez—
IL: I didn’t initial anything! No one ever gave me anything!
MH: There’s an easy way to clear up this disagreement, don’t you think, Jeri? Why don’t you show a copy of the letter in question to Ms. Mackenzie—
AJ: This is an outrage! Stuart, are you going to let him do this to me? Are you going to take the word of someone with a clear grudge against the paper over mine?
JV: Ms. Mackenzie has no reason to harbor a grudge against the paper. Do you, Ms. Mackenzie?
KM: No, of course not.
JV: Fine. Now, if you would just look at this paper here that was found in Mrs. Lopez’s personnel file. . . .
SH: Mitch, could I please see you in the hallway?
MH: Hang on a minute, Stuie. I want to see what Ms. Mackenzie has to say.
SH: Mitch. The hallway. Now.
JV: Mr. Hertzog, could you please be quiet? Ms. Mackenzie is trying to concentrate.
SH: Oh, you have got to be shitting me with this, Jeri.
JV: I beg your pardon, but I’m not. Part of my client’s case against the paper includes the fact that proper procedure for dismissal—in this case as stipulated by her union—was not followed. And yet, miraculously, this piece of paper, which my client says she’s never seen before, has appeared in her file. I just want to verify that Ms. Mackenzie did indeed write and send it. Ms. Mackenzie? Did you indeed write and send the letter of written warning you are holding in your hand right now?
AJ: You can’t ask her to remember every piece of paper that crosses her desk. She’s just a paper pusher, after all—
JV: Again, Mitch, I’d like to ask that you control your client.
MH: Amy. Cool it.
SH: Cool this, Mitch.
MH: Miriam, could you please let it be noted in the transcript that counsel for the defense just gave his fellow counsel for the defense what is known in the vernacular as “the finger”?
ML: Yes, sir.
SH: Miriam, strike that.
MH: Too late. Isn’t it, Miriam?
ML: Yes, sir.
JV: Ms. Mackenzie.
KM: Yes?
JV: The paper you’re holding. Do you remember writing it?
KM: Um. Well, I remember starting it . . . or one like it.
AJ: See? See, I told you she couldn’t remember. Can I go now?
JV: Please, Ms. Jenkins. Ms. Mackenzie?
KM: But I didn’t write this.
AJ: She’s lying!
SH: Really, Jeri, can’t you see what she’s doing? This young woman has a grudge against her employer because Ms. Jenkins had to reprimand her yesterday for wearing a skirt of an inappropriate length to the office, and she’s just trying to—
JV: Is that true, Ms. Mackenzie?
KM: Well. Yes, about the skirt. I mean, Amy issued me a warning letter about it.
MH: That skirt you had on yesterday? That black suede one you wore to the restaurant?
KM: Um. Yes.
MH: I liked that skirt. What was wrong with that skirt?
SH: Would you PLEASE stick to the topic at hand, Mitchell? We’re talking about forgery here. Because if that girl is saying she didn’t send the letter she’s holding, that is a very serious accusation—
MH: Did you sign this letter, Kate?
KM: That looks like my signature. But I didn’t write—or sign—this letter.
AJ: That’s impossible!
MH: And you didn’t hand that letter to Mrs. Lopez to initial?
KM: At no time did I hand any document of any kind to Mrs. Lopez to sign.
JV: Thank you very much, Ms. Mackenzie. Mr. Hertzog, Ms. Jenkins, looks like I’ll be seeing you both in court. Ida, let’s go.
SH: Hold on just a minute, here! Jeri, put your damned briefcase down. We aren’t done yet.
MH: Really? I think we are.
SH: Excuse me, Ms. Mackenzie. Do you realize the seriousness of what you’re saying?
MH: Do you think we’re done, Jeri?
JV: Very much so, Mitch.
SH: You’re implying, Ms. Mackenzie, that somebody has committed forgery.
KM: Well. I don’t know about that. All I know is, I didn’t write that letter. And I didn’t give it to Mrs. Lopez to sign.
MH: Thank yo
u very much, Ms. Mackenzie. You may go now.
SH: No, she may not fucking go, Mitch.
JV: Well, my client and I are fucking going.
SH: Nobody is going anywhere. Ms. Mackenzie, how long have you worked at the New York Journal?
JV: Stuart, Ms. Mackenzie has already been deposed. I’m not interested in—
SH: Yes, but you asked that she be brought here today, to help clear some things up—your words, no?
JV: Yes, but—
SH: Well, that’s all I’m trying to do. Help clear things up. Now. Ms. Mackenzie, you’ve been with the paper for a little less than a year, correct?
MH: Stuart, this is my case, I believe, not yours.
KM: Um. Yes?
SH: Right. And I believe you were hired on the strong recommendation of your friend, Ms. Jennifer Sadler. Is that correct?
KM: Jen told me about the opening in her office, yes, and I applied. . . .
MH: I believe your exact words, Stuart, were that you were too personally involved in the case to want to get involved. . . .
SH: And so you were hired, is that correct, Ms. Mackenzie? And you and Jen, as you call her . . . Would you say she is your best friend?
MH: Stuart, where the hell are you going with this?
SH: Excuse me. I ask only to be extended the same courtesy I extended to you, Mitchell. Were you not, Ms. Mackenzie, living with Ms. Sadler until recently?
KM: Well, I . . . I mean, I’ve been having some trouble finding a place, and so I was staying at Jen’s until I could find somewhere I could afford on my own. . . .
SH: And do you and Ms. Sadler—whom I believe you met in college—sometimes gossip in the workplace?
MH: Stuart. Really. What does this—
SH: Oh, that will become apparent. Don’t you two like to pass notes, and Instant Message each other, and e-mail back and forth between your computers on an almost constant basis, Ms. Mackenzie?
KM: Well, Jen and I . . . I mean, we maintain a close working relationship, and she helps me with many work-related projects—
SH: Work-related. Is your commenting on the apparel of your supervisor, Ms. Jenkins, work related?
KM: Well, apparently her commenting on mine is—so, yes.
MH: Touché.
SH: What about referring to Ms. Jenkins as . . . What is it again? Oh, yes. The T.O.D. Is that work related?
KM: How did you—
MH: Stuart. Cut it out.
JV: I agree with Mitch. What does any of this have to do with the fact that your client—or at least someone in her office—forged my client’s initials on a document she never even saw?
SH: I’m getting to that. What does T.O.D. mean, Ms. Mackenzie?
KM: Um. It means . . . It means Tough On Doubters. Because Amy’s always very tough on people who doubt . . . her ability.
SH: Tough on Doubters.
KM: Uh-huh.
SH: You realize you’re supposed to be telling the truth here, don’t you, Ms. Mackenzie?
KM: (inaudible)
SH: What was that, Ms. Mackenzie?
KM: Nothing.
SH: Isn’t it true that you and Ms. Sadler dislike Ms. Jenkins, and spend most of your time at the office every day making fun of her?
KM: No. That’s not true at all.
SH: Isn’t it also true that you are friendly with a number of New York Journal employees who’d like nothing better than to see Mrs. Lopez reinstated?
KM: Well, yes. I mean, everybody loves Mrs. Lopez, and we all miss her very much—
SH: That is an inaccurate statement right there. Not everyone at the New York Journal loves Mrs. Lopez. Not everyone believes she is entitled to get her job back. Not everyone agrees she even MAKES the best key lime pie in the city—
MH: Stuart. Come on. This is getting personal now, and I don’t think—
SH: YOUR friends are the only ones who feel that way, isn’t that so, Ms. Mackenzie? Including the woman you are now living with, Ms. Dolly Vargas. Who happens to be involved—and I mean in the romantic sense—with the owner of the New York Journal, Peter Hargrave, who ALSO expressed regret at the loss of Mrs. Lopez’s baked goods. Isn’t that so, Ms. Mackenzie?
KM: Isn’t what so? That I’m living with Dolly, or that Peter likes Mrs. Lopez’s cinnamon buns?
SH: Isn’t it true, Ms. Mackenzie, that you and the entire staff of the New York Journal are so addicted to this woman’s baking that you are lying about not having written that letter of warning in order to afford her a loophole with which she might win back her post?
KM: No!
MH: Stuart. Come on.
SH: Isn’t it true that your dislike of Amy Jenkins is so strong that you would do anything to get her into trouble with her superiors—such as deny having written a document that has what even you stated appears to be your signature on it?
KM: No! I mean, yes, it looks like my signature, but it’s not. I never even got a chance to finish writing it. Amy e-mailed me and said—
SH: That’s all. No more questions.
KM: But it’s not true. About the letter. I mean—
SH: I said no more questions, Ms. Mackenzie.
MH: I have a question for you, Stuart. How do you sleep at night?
SH: Better than you will, when Dad hears about this. Come on, Amy. We’re done here.
Journal of Kate Mackenzie
I’m in trouble. BIG trouble.
Oh my God. Oh my God, I don’t understand any of this. Mitch says it’s nothing, but I think he’s just saying that to make me feel better. It’s not nothing. It’s clearly not nothing. I mean, my boss just accused me of being a liar. How can that be nothing?
And I can see how from her point of view it would be more beneficial for me to be perceived as a liar than, you know, her. Which is basically what she is. I mean, ONE of us is lying, and if it’s not me, it has to be her. Because I certainly never wrote that letter, and I certainly never had Mrs. Lopez sign it.
So who did?
At least I have Mrs. Lopez to back me up. She says she didn’t sign it either.
Except . . .
I’m sorry, Mrs. Lopez is very sweet, but she’s not the most reliable witness. I mean, she definitely has an agenda, which is getting her job back. Mine is apparently that I want to get back at AMY, but for what? I mean, it’s true I think she’s a big, shallow loser and it’s true we call her the T.O.D., but how did she find out? Jen’s going to freak when she hears Amy knows, and the last thing I want is to freak out Jen, she’s got enough problems as it is with the fertility thing and—
OH!!! I’ve got to get control of myself. Think about something other than Stuart Hertzog. Think about kittens and rainbows. Oh yuck, that won’t work. Think about the Travel Channel. Yes, the Travel Channel, teal blue seas and yawning blue sky overhead, little huts on stilts above the water, like in Bali . . .
Oh my God, I can’t believe my boss basically accused me of being a liar in front of Mitch Hertzog, the one person in the world I wanted to impress with my cool professionalism. So far I’ve blathered about chicken and garlic sauce to him, had my ex-boyfriend THROW chicken in garlic sauce on him, nearly gotten sick in front of him, had my ex sing ballads in front of him, and now my boss is calling me a liar in front of him. . . .
Mitch says all I have to do is go back to my office and find the e-mail Amy sent me—the one telling me to skip the written warning—and forward it to him. Also forward him the draft of the letter I was writing to Mrs. Lopez but never finished. He seems to think this will make everything all right.
But how will it make everything all right? Sure, it’ll prove I didn’t have anything to do with that letter. But it won’t help the Journal win Mrs. Lopez’s case against it. And isn’t Mitch supposed to be on the paper’s side, not Mrs. Lopez’s? I mean, isn’t the Journal paying his fees?
But it’s like . . . it’s like he wants Mrs. Lopez to win. Like he set up this whole thing to make Amy look like the big, fat liar she is.
&n
bsp; Which is fine, except that . . .
Amy KNOWS we call her the T.O.D. She KNOWS.
I mean, that’s not going to make working with her slightly UNCOMFORTABLE or anything. . . .
Oh, WHY did we ever start calling her that? I mean, she IS a tyrannical office despot, but we ought to have kept it to ourselves. It isn’t nice to call people names, even if they deserve it. All human beings have worth and dignity, that’s what Professor Wingblade always said. All human beings have worth and dignity. Except maybe for Nazis. And Al-Qaeda. And tyrannical office despots. . . .
STOP IT! Amy is not as bad as Hitler! She hasn’t killed anyone.
THAT WE KNOW OF.
I will never call her the T.O.D. again. I will never call her the T.O.D. again. I will never call her the T.O.D. again. I will—
Oh, God, my cab is a block away from 216 W. 57th even as I write. Please God, don’t let Amy be there when I walk in. Please let me get to my desk and forward the e-mail and the draft and get my stuff and go home sick for the rest of the day. . . . Please please please please please . . .
$4.50, plus $1 tip for cab. Don’t forget to send the T.O.D. a reimbursement form!
Wait . . . Why is Carl Hopkins standing by the door?
THE NEW YORK JOURNAL
New York City’s Leading Photo-Newspaper
Security Division
The New York Journal
216 W. 57th Street
New York, NY 10019
212-555-6890
MEMO
To: All Personnel
Fr: Security Administration
Re: Persona Non Grata
Persona Non Grata Notification
Please note that the below-named individual has been classified “persona non grata” in 216 W. 57th Street as of the date of this notification and will continue to remain so indefinitely. This individual is not to be allowed on the premises of 216 W. 57th Street at any time during the term of above sanction.
Name: Kathleen A. Mackenzie
ID#: 3164-000-6794
Description: (photo attached)
White female, 25 years of age
5 feet, 4 inches, 120130 lbs.
Blonde hair, blue eyes
Contact Security immediately upon sighting of above individual.