Harold Venn began cooperating without receiving what he demanded from me.<\/p>\n
The prosecutor apparently found other ways to interest him.<\/p>\n
Multiple federal counts.<\/p>\n
Fraud.<\/p>\n
Kidnapping.<\/p>\n
Racketeering.<\/p>\n
Identity manipulation.<\/p>\n
Potential conspiracy connected to three deaths.<\/p>\n
Harold still wanted control.<\/p>\n
Prison narrowed his options.<\/p>\n
His first proffer session lasted six hours.<\/p>\n
I did not attend.<\/p>\n
I received a factual summary afterward.<\/p>\n
Finch had worked for Harold for nearly fifteen years.<\/p>\n
Private surveillance.<\/p>\n
Unauthorized entry.<\/p>\n
Intimidation.<\/p>\n
Asset recovery.<\/p>\n
\u201cRecovery,\u201d I said.<\/p>\n
Rebecca nodded.<\/p>\n
\u201cHarold\u2019s word.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cOf course.\u201d<\/p>\n
Finch\u2019s involvement in the earlier policy cases varied.<\/p>\n
Leonard Shaw.<\/p>\n
The Florida balcony fall.<\/p>\n
Harold admitted Finch entered Shaw\u2019s vacation property the night before the death.<\/p>\n
Purpose, according to Harold:<\/p>\n
Retrieve financial records.<\/p>\n
Shaw returned unexpectedly.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat happened?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHarold claims he doesn\u2019t know.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cConvenient.\u201d<\/p>\n
Finch refused to talk.<\/p>\n
Physical evidence from years earlier was limited.<\/p>\n
But travel data placed him there.<\/p>\n
A recovered Venn ledger entry read:<\/p>\n
L.S. confrontation escalated. Unplanned outcome. Policy event favorable.<\/p>\n
Unplanned outcome.<\/p>\n
A human death converted into accounting language.<\/p>\n
Marianne Dole\u2019s car crash.<\/p>\n
Harold admitted Finch tampered with her vehicle.<\/p>\n
His claimed purpose:<\/p>\n
Create a breakdown so a hostile acquisition meeting could be delayed.<\/p>\n
Investigators found the old crash report.<\/p>\n
Brake-line failure had been suspected but blamed on road debris.<\/p>\n
Now forensic photographs showed damage inconsistent with debris.<\/p>\n
Harold claimed he never instructed Finch to create a fatal crash.<\/p>\n
Another ledger line:<\/p>\n
M.D. intervention exceeded parameters.<\/p>\n
Again.<\/p>\n
Passive language for somebody else\u2019s death.<\/p>\n
Robert Keene.<\/p>\n
Home burglary.<\/p>\n
Harold admitted sending Finch to recover documents from Keene\u2019s office.<\/p>\n
Keene confronted him.<\/p>\n
Harold claimed Finch fled.<\/p>\n
Keene suffered cardiac arrest.<\/p>\n
But an old autopsy noted bruising on Keene\u2019s neck and wrists, initially attributed to his collapse and emergency treatment.<\/p>\n
Federal investigators reopened the case.<\/p>\n
\u201cHarold expects us to believe every death happened because Finch misunderstood instructions.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThree times.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
Rebecca\u2019s face showed what she thought.<\/p>\n
But she did not convert suspicion into fact.<\/p>\n
Neither would I.<\/p>\n
Then investigators showed us communication between Harold and Finch from my own case.<\/p>\n
Most was coded.<\/p>\n
One message was not.<\/p>\n
H.V.:<\/p>\n
No contact with E.B.C. physically. Pressure only unless separate authorization.<\/p>\n
Finch:<\/p>\n
Understood.<\/p>\n
That mattered.<\/p>\n
At least at that moment, Harold prohibited physically harming me.<\/p>\n
Then another message, dated after I dissolved the foundation.<\/p>\n
H.V.:<\/p>\n
New posture. Preserve subject through signature event.<\/p>\n
After signature event?<\/p>\n
Finch:<\/p>\n
Then?<\/p>\n
No reply.<\/p>\n
Preserve me until I signed something.<\/p>\n
Afterward unspecified.<\/p>\n
Harold\u2019s claim that he never contemplated harm became harder to believe.<\/p>\n
The prosecutor asked him directly what would have happened after I signed the statement undermining Dad\u2019s settlement.<\/p>\n
Harold refused to answer.<\/p>\n
Cooperation had limits.<\/p>\n
Catherine\u2019s name appeared repeatedly in his proffer.<\/p>\n
Not as victim.<\/p>\n
Not exactly.<\/p>\n
As early partner.<\/p>\n
Harold said Catherine knew more about the Bennett Access Strategy than she admitted.<\/p>\n
She had helped select targets.<\/p>\n
She had monitored Mark\u2019s early relationship with me.<\/p>\n
We already knew much of that.<\/p>\n
Then Harold claimed Catherine later helped revive one insurance concept after Mark rejected it.<\/p>\n
That was new.<\/p>\n
Catherine denied it.<\/p>\n
Until investigators showed her an email.<\/p>\n
Eight years earlier.<\/p>\n
From Catherine to Harold.<\/p>\n
Subject:<\/p>\n
Protection Option.<\/p>\n
Text:<\/p>\n
If Mark actually stays with her, direct access may be impossible. Explore insurance as alternative participation without requiring trust control.<\/p>\n
I read the sentence three times.<\/p>\n
Catherine had proposed insurance.<\/p>\n
Not necessarily murder.<\/p>\n
But monetizing my death.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhen?\u201d I asked.<\/p>\n
Rebecca checked.<\/p>\n
\u201cThree months after your wedding.\u201d<\/p>\n
Catherine had already approached Adrian by then.<\/p>\n
She had warned him about Mark.<\/p>\n
Yet at nearly the same time, she discussed an insurance structure with Harold.<\/p>\n
Both things.<\/p>\n
Warn me indirectly.<\/p>\n
Profit if something happened to me.<\/p>\n
People rarely fit into one moral category.<\/p>\n
Catherine requested a meeting.<\/p>\n
She looked smaller every time I saw her.<\/p>\n
Maybe because secrets had been carrying her upright.<\/p>\n
\u201cI didn\u2019t mean life insurance.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThe email says insurance.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cBusiness-continuity insurance.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cOn me.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat kind of continuity does my death create for a business I didn\u2019t work for?\u201d<\/p>\n
She closed her eyes.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt was leverage.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cExplain.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cIf Mark stayed married to you, I thought I\u2019d never recover what he owed me.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cSo you wanted a financial interest connected to my life.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHow much?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI don\u2019t remember.\u201d<\/p>\n
Harold\u2019s records remembered.<\/p>\n
Proposed policy:<\/p>\n
Ten million dollars.<\/p>\n
Catherine participation:<\/p>\n
Fifteen percent.<\/p>\n
One and a half million dollars if I died.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou were willing to collect money if I died.\u201d<\/p>\n
Her voice broke.<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDid you want me dead?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNo.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDid you understand that people behave differently when they profit from someone\u2019s death?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI do now.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDidn\u2019t understand then?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI didn\u2019t let myself.\u201d<\/p>\n
That answer felt true.<\/p>\n
Self-deception was cheaper than innocence.<\/p>\n
Rebecca asked whether Mark knew about Catherine\u2019s proposal.<\/p>\n
\u201cNo.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHarold?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDid Harold create the policy?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNot that version.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWhy not?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThomas found out.\u201d<\/p>\n
Dad again.<\/p>\n
Apparently Adrian had informed him that Catherine warned of Mark.<\/p>\n
Dad investigated.<\/p>\n
He discovered insurance inquiries connected to me.<\/p>\n
He threatened Harold.<\/p>\n
That likely produced the first cancellation.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat did you do after Dad confronted Harold?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI withdrew.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cBecause you were scared.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNot because it was wrong.\u201d<\/p>\n
Catherine looked at me.<\/p>\n
\u201cBoth.\u201d<\/p>\n
I believed both too.<\/p>\n
She handed us another document voluntarily.<\/p>\n
A letter she wrote to Dad but never sent.<\/p>\n
Thomas,<\/p>\n
You were right to distrust me.<\/p>\n
Mark was right to leave the arrangement.<\/p>\n
I wasn\u2019t.<\/p>\n
I wanted the money more than I wanted to admit what we had done.<\/p>\n
I\u2019m telling Adrian because I don\u2019t trust myself to tell Emily.<\/p>\n
I read the date.<\/p>\n
Eight years ago.<\/p>\n
\u201cSo you tried to warn me.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cIndirectly.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cAnd still kept silent publicly.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThen took money later.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThen helped Mark move money again.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
No more excuses.<\/p>\n
Oddly, that made the conversation easier.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat do you want now?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cTo testify.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cAgainst Harold?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cAnd Mark.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cEven if it exposes you.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWhy?\u201d<\/p>\n
She took a long time to answer.<\/p>\n
\u201cBecause every time I was afraid before, somebody else paid.\u201d<\/p>\n
That sentence stayed with me.<\/p>\n
The prosecutor accepted her cooperation subject to charges.<\/p>\n
No immunity guaranteed.<\/p>\n
Good.<\/p>\n
Truth did not require reward.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile Northstar\u2019s restructuring progressed.<\/p>\n
Employees elected Lena as permanent trust representative after her interim term.<\/p>\n
She tried declining again.<\/p>\n
Paul told her to stop.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou\u2019ve been bossing dispatchers for twelve years. You can survive a board meeting.\u201d<\/p>\n
She told him to mind his own warehouse.<\/p>\n
That exchange was the most normal thing I had heard in days.<\/p>\n
The restructuring team proposed David Chen as independent board chair.<\/p>\n
His history with Marianne Dole worried me until federal investigators cleared his involvement in Harold\u2019s earlier scheme.<\/p>\n
David had resisted Venn.<\/p>\n
That mattered.<\/p>\n
He did not accept immediately.<\/p>\n
\u201cI don\u2019t want to run another company built around one personality.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNeither do I,\u201d I said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThen governance first.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
Independent audit committee.<\/p>\n
Employee board seats.<\/p>\n
No related-party transactions without external review.<\/p>\n
No owner-spouse override.<\/p>\n
No hidden family guarantees.<\/p>\n
No personal use of corporate funds.<\/p>\n
Rules that sounded obvious now.<\/p>\n
Dad\u2019s line returned.<\/p>\n
Good rules aren\u2019t an insult to good people.<\/p>\n
They\u2019re protection against bad circumstances.<\/p>\n
Northstar\u2019s employees voted overwhelmingly to support the restructure.<\/p>\n
Not because they trusted me.<\/p>\n
Because the documents gave them rights.<\/p>\n
That difference felt healthy.<\/p>\n
James continued reviewing the original trust guarantee.<\/p>\n
The bank\u2019s lawyers offered settlement.<\/p>\n
They would acknowledge material misrepresentations in Northstar\u2019s financial package.<\/p>\n
My trust would remain liable for a reduced portion reflecting legitimate disclosed debt.<\/p>\n
\u201cHow much?\u201d<\/p>\n
Four million dollars.<\/p>\n
Still enormous.<\/p>\n
Far below worst-case exposure.<\/p>\n
Rebecca asked whether I wanted to fight for zero.<\/p>\n
\u201cCan we win?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cPossibly.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cCost?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYears.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cRisk?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cMeaningful.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWould settlement hurt Northstar?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cIt clarifies obligations and improves restructuring.\u201d<\/p>\n
I thought about my real signature.<\/p>\n
My failure to review.<\/p>\n
Mark\u2019s falsified certification.<\/p>\n
The bank\u2019s own responsibility.<\/p>\n
Shared errors.<\/p>\n
Unequal wrongdoing.<\/p>\n
\u201cNegotiate lower.\u201d<\/p>\n
Rebecca smiled.<\/p>\n
\u201cHow much?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThree.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThey\u2019ll reject it.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThen three-five.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNow you sound like Thomas.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDon\u2019t insult me.\u201d<\/p>\n
She laughed.<\/p>\n
The final number became $3.4 million over several years, paid from trust investment income without forcing asset sales.<\/p>\n
The bank waived further guarantee claims.<\/p>\n
Northstar\u2019s core debt became manageable.<\/p>\n
I signed every page only after reading them.<\/p>\n
Every page.<\/p>\n
Rebecca nearly fell asleep waiting.<\/p>\n
\u201cEnjoying yourself?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNo.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cGood.\u201d<\/p>\n
When I reached the signature line, I stopped.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNothing.\u201d<\/p>\n
I drew the tiny upward stroke under my surname.<\/p>\n
This time I understood every paragraph above it.<\/p>\n
Later that afternoon, federal investigators called.<\/p>\n
Finch had begun negotiating too.<\/p>\n
Unlike Harold, he did not want philosophy.<\/p>\n
He wanted fewer years.<\/p>\n
He admitted tampering with Marianne Dole\u2019s car.<\/p>\n
He admitted entering Leonard Shaw\u2019s condo.<\/p>\n
He admitted restraining Robert Keene during the burglary.<\/p>\n
\u201cDid he kill them?\u201d<\/p>\n
The investigator answered carefully.<\/p>\n
\u201cHe admits conduct that contributed to each death. Charging decisions are pending.\u201d<\/p>\n
That was the factual answer.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat about me?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHe admits truck sabotage, badge theft coordination, hazardous-material transport and following you.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cFollowing me when?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cMore than you knew.\u201d<\/p>\n
My stomach tightened.<\/p>\n
Finch had tracked me during the supermarket incident.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHe was outside the store.\u201d<\/p>\n
I saw the flower display.<\/p>\n
Evelyn.<\/p>\n
My declined card.<\/p>\n
People moving around me.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhy?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHarold wanted to observe your reaction.\u201d<\/p>\n
Of course.<\/p>\n
The grocery-store humiliation had not only been Mark\u2019s provocation.<\/p>\n
Harold was collecting behavior.<\/p>\n
Evidence for incapacity.<\/p>\n
\u201cHe filmed me?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWhere is it?\u201d<\/p>\n
Investigators showed us.<\/p>\n
Video from outside.<\/p>\n
Me leaving without groceries.<\/p>\n
Sitting in my car.<\/p>\n
Hands shaking.<\/p>\n
Calling James.<\/p>\n
From one angle, it could be edited to look like distress.<\/p>\n
From reality, it was exactly what happened to someone discovering betrayal.<\/p>\n
Then the footage showed something else.<\/p>\n
Evelyn leaving the store.<\/p>\n
She walked toward a dark sedan.<\/p>\n
Finch\u2019s.<\/p>\n
He rolled down the window.<\/p>\n
They spoke.<\/p>\n
I stared.<\/p>\n
\u201cShe knew him.\u201d<\/p>\n
Evelyn had said she did not understand the full plan.<\/p>\n
Maybe true.<\/p>\n
But she had spoken to Harold\u2019s operative the morning my card was frozen.<\/p>\n
We called her in.<\/p>\n
She watched the video.<\/p>\n
Her face emptied.<\/p>\n
\u201cWho is Finch?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYou tell me.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI knew him as Michael.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cFrom where?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHarold.\u201d<\/p>\n
There it was.<\/p>\n
Again.<\/p>\n
\u201cHow long?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYears.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHow many?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cSeven.\u201d<\/p>\n
Rebecca\u2019s expression hardened.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou told us Venn pushed guardianship only recently.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHe did.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cBut you knew his field operative.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI didn\u2019t know what Michael did.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat did you think?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cInvestigations.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cOf Emily?\u201d<\/p>\n
Evelyn looked at me.<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cSeven years?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNot constantly.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHow many times did you hire him?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cTwice.\u201d<\/p>\n
My chest tightened.<\/p>\n
\u201cFor what?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThe first time, I wanted to know whether your father was investigating Mark.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cAnd the second?\u201d<\/p>\n
She whispered.<\/p>\n
\u201cTo learn whether you were planning to leave him.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWhen?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThree years ago.\u201d<\/p>\n
I stared.<\/p>\n
\u201cI wasn\u2019t.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI know.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWhy did you think I was?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cMark was losing money. He became paranoid.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cSo you hired someone to follow me.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDid Mark know?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNo.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat did Finch find?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNothing.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDid that stop you?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cFor a while.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cAnd the supermarket?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHarold told me Michael might be nearby.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWhy didn\u2019t you say that earlier?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cBecause every truth made me look worse.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThat has not improved with delay.\u201d<\/p>\n
She nodded.<\/p>\n
Then she said something I did not expect.<\/p>\n
\u201cI want to testify too.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cAgainst Mark?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cAgainst Harold?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cAgainst yourself?\u201d<\/p>\n
Her eyes filled.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf necessary.\u201d<\/p>\n
The circle was closing.<\/p>\n
Not because everyone became good.<\/p>\n
Because hiding had become more expensive than speaking.<\/p>\n
Then Rebecca received a message from the court.<\/p>\n
Harold\u2019s attorneys had produced Claire\u2019s original settlement challenge.<\/p>\n
They claimed Mom\u2019s Meridian penalty clause had never taken effect because one required witness signature was invalid.<\/p>\n
Witness:<\/p>\n
Samuel Hodge.<\/p>\n
Harold alleged Sam\u2019s signature was forged.<\/p>\n
If true, Mom\u2019s transfer condition could collapse.<\/p>\n
My provisional control of Meridian could disappear.<\/p>\n
The insurance structures.<\/p>\n
Blackglass accounts.<\/p>\n
Victim recovery funds.<\/p>\n
All could return to litigation.<\/p>\n
Sam was called in.<\/p>\n
He looked at the document.<\/p>\n
Then at me.<\/p>\n
\u201cThat is not my signature.\u201d<\/p>\n
My stomach dropped.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou\u2019re sure?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThen who signed?\u201d<\/p>\n
Sam turned the page.<\/p>\n
Beneath his supposed witness mark was a second line nobody had focused on before.<\/p>\n
Prepared by:<\/p>\n
Claire Bennett.<\/p>\n
And next to it, initials.<\/p>\n
T.B.<\/p>\n
Dad.<\/p>\n
If Sam had not witnessed Mom\u2019s agreement, then either Mom or Dad had falsified the execution.<\/p>\n
After weeks of exposing forged documents created against me, we were now staring at evidence that one of my parents may have done the same thing.<\/p>\n
Harold Venn began cooperating without receiving what he demanded from me. The prosecutor apparently found other ways to interest him. Multiple federal counts. Fraud. Kidnapping. Racketeering. Identity manipulation. Potential conspiracy … <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":27485,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-27511","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-insightdrama"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/insightdrama.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27511","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/insightdrama.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/insightdrama.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/insightdrama.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/insightdrama.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=27511"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/insightdrama.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27511\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":27546,"href":"https:\/\/insightdrama.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27511\/revisions\/27546"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/insightdrama.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/27485"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/insightdrama.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=27511"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/insightdrama.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=27511"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/insightdrama.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=27511"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}