Chapter 36: The Puppet Show – Robbie’s Deposition and the Collapsing Case
⚠️ Spoiler Warning: This guide contains detailed spoilers for the entire novel. Proceed only if you've finished reading or are comfortable knowing the plot.
Summary
While Bodie lies in bed watching global news, her friends Alder, Britt, and Geoff recount the bizarre deposition of Robbie Serenho that morning. Robbie takes the stand with his lawyer hovering behind him, prompting every response. The attorney nods for simple biographical questions and shakes his head when Amy asks whether Robbie’s relationship with Thalia was sexual—triggering Robbie to invoke his Fifth Amendment right. This pattern repeats for every subsequent question. On cross-examination, the state asks only one question: “Were you responsible for the death of Thalia Keith?” Robbie answers loudly and forcefully, “No.” Geoff and Yahav both conclude there is no viable case against Robbie, leaving Bodie to wrestle with the injustice of a system that prosecuted an innocent man named Omar while letting the likely perpetrator walk free.
Key Events
- Bodie spends Thursday morning in bed, glued to CNN coverage of global disasters, while Robbie Serenho’s deposition unfolds.
- Alder, Britt, and Geoff individually describe the scene: Robbie’s lawyer hovers “like a puppeteer,” visibly directing each answer.
- Amy asks if Robbie’s relationship with Thalia was sexual; the attorney shakes his head, and Robbie invokes the Fifth.
- Every subsequent question from Amy is met with the same Fifth Amendment invocation, after a headshake from the lawyer.
- On cross-examination, the state asks only whether Robbie caused Thalia’s death; he denies it forcefully.
- Geoff remarks that “the fucker’s gonna get away with it,” and Yahav calls Bodie to say there is no case against Robbie.
- Bodie reflects on the parallel: no case was ever made against Omar either, yet he was convicted.
Character Development
- Bodie Kane: Processes the deposition from a distance, contrasting the smallness of New Hampshire events with global catastrophes. Her frustration grows as she recognizes the asymmetry of justice: Omar was prosecuted with no case, while Robbie may never be charged despite overwhelming suspicion.
- Robbie Serenho: Revealed as utterly dependent on his lawyer’s cues; his only independent statement is a loud denial of responsibility. The deposition underscores his calculated use of legal protections rather than any attempt at clarity or remorse.
- Geoff and Yahav: Serve as voices of legal realism, bluntly stating the collapse of any prosecution. Their certainty deepens Bodie’s sense of powerlessness.
Themes, Symbols, or Motifs
- Performance and Manipulation: The lawyer “hovering like a puppeteer” turns the deposition into a scripted theater. Robbie’s answers are not his own words but choreographed responses, symbolizing how the legal system can be weaponized to evade truth.
- Institutional Failure: The state’s meager cross-examination (a single question) highlights how the same system that railroaded Omar is now unwilling or unable to pursue Robbie. Justice appears arbitrary and capricious.
- Scale and Perspective: Bodie watches “global calamities” that make New Hampshire feel “microscopic,” yet the local injustice remains emotionally central. The juxtaposition questions whether macro crises excuse micro failures.
Why This Chapter Matters
Chapter 36 is a turning point in the novel’s exploration of justice. It confirms what readers have suspected: Robbie Serenho will likely never face accountability for Thalia’s murder. The deposition scene crystallizes the power imbalance between the wealthy defendant with legal resources and the dead girl whose case was mishandled from the start. Bodie’s reflection that “there was no case against Omar, either” ties the chapter to the novel’s core indictment of a system that punishes the vulnerable while protecting the privileged. This moment sets up the final chapters’ tension: can Bodie, or anyone, still force justice when the official process has failed?
Study Questions and Answers
-
Why does Robbie invoke the Fifth Amendment on every question except the final denial?
Answer: His lawyer directs him to answer only those questions that pose no risk of self-incrimination (like his years at Granby). The attorney prevents any answer about the sexual nature of his relationship with Thalia, and by extension any detail that could link him to her death. The final denial is calculated to create a public record of innocence without exposing him to further questioning. -
What does Bodie mean when she says, “there was no case against Omar, either”?
Answer: Bodie draws a parallel between two flawed prosecutions: Omar was convicted despite weak evidence, while Robbie will likely never be tried despite suggestive evidence. The phrase underscores the novel’s theme that the legal system does not aim for truth but produces outcomes shaped by race, money, and institutional inertia. -
How does the contrast between Bodie’s morning (watching CNN) and the deposition strengthen the chapter’s emotional effect?
Answer: Bodie’s immersion in global disasters emphasizes how overwhelming and distant large-scale suffering can feel. Yet the deposition—a small, local event—consumes her friends’ attention and her own emotional energy. This contrast suggests that personal, tangible injustice can be just as devastating as faraway tragedies, and that we often use the scale of global problems to avoid confronting closer wrongs.