PART 17:
How did you respond? I argued, showed him the data again, explained that the engine design had fundamental flaws that would result in fires, brake failures, and deaths. Nathan looked directly at Mercer. He told me to drop it or I’d be fired. And did you drop it? No. I went to the engineering department head, then to the safety compliance office, then to HR. Nathan’s jaw tightened.
Everyone told me the same thing, that I was overreacting, that Mercer’s approval was enough, that I needed to be a team player. So, what did you do? I resigned. My wife had just died and I had a daughter to raise. I couldn’t work for a company that valued money over human lives. Warren pulled up another document.
And this that’s the first repair order I received 6 months after resigning. Mercer showed up at my garage with a defective CX7 engine and told me he needed it fixed quietly. Did you comply? Eventually, but I documented everything first, photographed the defects, recorded the serial numbers, kept copies of the shipping manifests. Nathan gestured toward the evidence table where his filing cabinets had been transported.
For 10 years, every engine they sent me was documented. every failure point, every safety hazard, everything they tried to hide. Why? It was a simple question, but Nathan had to think about the answer. Because someone had to remember, he finally said, “The people who died deserved someone who wouldn’t forget them, who wouldn’t let them be reduced to statistics or acceptable losses.
” His voice cracked slightly. They deserve someone to care that they’d existed. The courtroom was completely silent. Warren nodded slowly. No further questions. Mercer’s lead attorney stood. His name was Richard Vance, and he had the kind of expensive suit that screamed corporate defense lawyer. Mr.
Keller, you were fired from Crossline Motors for incompetence, weren’t you? I resigned after being told your work was substandard and your engineering report was rejected by multiple departments. My report was rejected because it was inconvenient, not because it was wrong or because it was based on flawed data and overcautious assumptions. Vance smiled.
You’re not exactly an unbiased observer, are you? You have a personal vendetta against Crossline Motors and specifically against Daniel Mercer. Nathan kept his voice level. I have a problem with companies that kill people for profit. That’s a dramatic interpretation. Isn’t it true that automotive manufacturing involves inherent risks? That no vehicle is perfectly safe.
It’s also true that vehicles can be made safer when engineers identify defects, which is what my report did. A report that was reviewed by multiple qualified engineers and deemed unnecessary. Engineers who were instructed by Mercer to dismiss my findings. Do you have proof of that instruction? Nathan hesitated.
The handwritten note was gone, stolen from his garage. Vance pounced on the silence. You don’t, do you? You’re asking this court to believe that Daniel Mercer, a respected executive with 40 years of industry experience, personally orchestrated a conspiracy to hide defects. Based on what? Your word? based on 10 years of documentation showing a pattern of documentation you created yourself in a garage with no oversight, no verification, no chain of custody that would prove these records weren’t fabricated. Warren stood. Objection. Mr.
Keller’s documentation has been verified against independent accident reports, warranty claims, and testimony from cooperating witness David Hang. Sustained. The judge said, “Mr. Vance, the documentation’s authenticity has been established. Move on. Vance nodded unbothered. Mr. Keller, you’re currently in a relationship with Vivian Cross, correct? Nathan’s stomach dropped.
That’s not relevant, isn’t it? Miss Cross lost her position as CEO after making public accusations against Crossline Motors. Accusations that conveniently align with your decadel long vendetta. One might wonder if you manipulated a vulnerable woman experiencing a professional crisis to support your claims. That’s Nathan’s hands clenched.
That’s not what happened. No. So, you’re not romantically involved with the former CEO whose testimony is central to this case? Warren objected. The judge sustained it, but the damage was done. The implication hung in the courtroom like smoke. Vance smiled. No further questions. Nathan left the stand feeling like he’d been stripped bare, like 10 years of work had been reduced to a vendetta and a relationship.
Viven testified next. She was calm, precise, and unflinching in admitting what she’d failed to see during her tenure as CEO. “I didn’t ask enough questions,” she said. “I trusted executives who told me everything was fine. I prioritized growth and profit without investigating where that profit came from.
” She looked at Mercer. That was my failure. But the conspiracy itself, the deliberate concealment of known defects, that was orchestrated by Daniel Mercer and the executive board, and I will testify to that until I can’t speak anymore. Vance tried to break her, suggested she was scorned, vindictive, romantically compromised. Viven didn’t flinch.
“I’m not here because of my relationship with Nathan Keller,” she said. “I’m here because 73 people are dead and I was the public face of the company that killed them. That’s my burden to carry. But Daniel Mercer gave the orders and I won’t let him hide behind me anymore. David Hong testified last. He walked through every meeting, every email, every recorded conversation.
👉 [Tap here for the Next Part ] 👈
