The Weight of Ink
Some truths are too heavy to ever leave the page.
The fluorescent hum in the motel room felt louder than the steady rain against the window. Sal traced a finger over the condensation, a smear of grime left behind. Cheap paper, lined yellow legal pad. A stubby pencil, chewed at the end, lay beside it. His knuckles were bruised, from what he couldn't even remember now, just another scuffle in another dive. He picked up the pencil, the lead gritty under his thumb. This was stupid. All of it.
He’d tried yesterday, the day before. Always the same start: “Dear Mikey.” Simple enough, right? Except nothing ever was. What do you say to a kid you haven't laid eyes on in a year, a kid whose mother probably filled his head with a million reasons why his old man was dirt? He chewed on the pencil. “It’s been a while, huh?” That felt hollow. A damn lie. It'd been forever.
He wanted to tell him about the ocean. Remembered that trip, Florida, when Mikey was five. Salt on the air, the boy squealing, chasing gulls. Sal had stolen that car, too. Small stuff back then. Now? Now it was different. Now it was the warehouse job, the one that went south. Benny, bleeding out on the concrete, gasping for breath, asking about his kids. Sal had left him there. Just ran. Benny was dead, he knew it. Mikey didn’t need to know his dad was *that* kind of man.
The words came in spurts, jagged, like busted glass. He tried to explain the rush, the feel of quick money in his hand, the promise of a better life. A life for Mikey. Yeah, right. He wrote: “I did it for us, son. To get us out of the hole.” Then he scratched it out. Another lie. He did it for the fix, the rush, the forgetting. He did it because he was a coward, scared of the straight and narrow, scared of being nothing. Scared of himself.
He could hear Mikey’s voice in his head, the way he used to ask, “When are you coming home, Dad?” His hand trembled, a knot tightening in his gut. The letter was a weight, a heavy stone in his chest. What would Mikey even make of it? A bunch of jumbled excuses from a ghost? Would it just confirm everything his mother said? Make the kid hate him more? He pressed the pencil down harder, the lead snapping.
The details of the warehouse job, they were a blur of adrenaline and panic. The alarm blaring, the flash of a security guard’s uniform, Benny screaming. Benny’s face. That was clear. His eyes, wide, desperate. Sal could still feel the cold sweat, the burning in his lungs as he sprinted for the fence, leaving Benny to whatever fate found him. Benny, who’d trusted him. Benny, who had *also* talked about his kids. Sal's throat felt raw, tight. He crumpled the half-written page, tossing it towards the overflowing trash bin. It missed, landing on the dirty carpet like another failure.
He started a new page. This time, no apologies. No excuses. Just the facts, as he saw them. “They’re looking for me, kid. Bad people. And the cops. Everyone.” He wrote about the silence of the road, the fear of every unfamiliar face. The gnawing hunger that wasn't for food. He wanted Mikey to know the truth, the ugly truth of what this life did to a man, how it ate him alive, piece by piece. Wanted him to know not to follow. But even that felt like preaching, a pathetic warning from a man already lost.
He thought about the return address. What would he put? Room 3B, The Golden Sands Motel, Interstate 70, Podunk, nowhere? A dead end for a dead man. The postage stamp felt like a joke. A flimsy piece of paper, a stamp, and then what? It would arrive, a toxic parcel, blowing up whatever small peace Mikey had managed to find without him. It would only drag the kid down, stain his clean slate with Sal’s filth.
The rain outside intensified, drumming a rhythm against the glass. He leaned his head back against the grimy wall, eyes closed. He could almost smell Mikey’s hair, that faint, sweet scent of kid-shampoo. He could feel the small hand in his. A memory, brittle as old bone. He opened his eyes, staring at the fresh sheet, the pencil still in his hand. What good was a letter if the words were just poison? What good was an apology when the damage was already done, irreversible?
He laid the pencil down gently. Too gently. Like it was something precious, fragile. He picked up the first crumpled page, then the second, the one with the blunt, brutal truths. He smoothed them out, stacked them neatly. There was no sending this. No confession, no goodbye, no warning. Just him, alone, with the weight of it all. He slid the stack under the mattress, a secret kept even from the shadows in the room. A knock, sharp and sudden, rattled the door. Sal froze, every muscle tight. The pencil rolled off the table, hitting the floor with a soft click.
About the Creator
HAADI
Dark Side Of Our Society
Losing Sweet Holly
Holly Cantrell was a mother of two boys and a wife to an ill husband. Holly was a Physical Therapist Technician at the McAlester Regional Health Center. She was a Bouncy Brunette with a fun sense of Humor. Holly made friends easily and often had lunch with friends at work. Friends, to have a charming Physical therapist while they are pushing and pulling on the sore parts, is such a good thing. But things were noticeably different one cold Friday Morning in January.
By Cassie Moore4 days ago in Criminal
Minneapolis ICE Shooting Updates
In recent weeks, Minneapolis has found itself at the center of a growing legal and political controversy following a shooting involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. What initially appeared to be a straightforward federal use-of-force investigation has evolved into a broader dispute between state authorities and federal officials, raising serious questions about transparency, jurisdiction, and accountability. The most significant development so far is the state’s claim that it has been denied access to key evidence related to the incident. As public attention intensifies, the case is no longer just about what happened during the shooting. It is increasingly about who controls the facts, who gets to investigate them, and how justice is supposed to function when federal and state systems collide. What We Know About the Minneapolis ICE Shooting The shooting occurred during a federal immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis. ICE agents were reportedly conducting official duties when gunfire erupted, resulting in injuries and immediate emergency response. Federal authorities confirmed the incident and stated that internal protocols were activated, including an automatic review by federal oversight bodies. From the beginning, details were limited. Officials cited the ongoing nature of the investigation and concerns about officer safety. This lack of information, while not unusual in federal cases, quickly became a point of friction for Minnesota state authorities, who argued that the public deserved clarity and that the state had a legal role to play in examining the incident. State Authorities Push for Transparency Minnesota state officials, including investigators and legal representatives, formally requested access to evidence connected to the shooting. This evidence reportedly includes body camera footage, surveillance recordings, forensic reports, and internal communication logs from the operation. According to state representatives, these requests were either delayed or denied outright. The state has since gone on record stating that it cannot independently assess the legality of the shooting without full access to the materials. This denial has fueled concerns that federal agencies are operating without sufficient external oversight, especially in incidents involving potential civilian harm. State leaders emphasized that their position is not adversarial by default. Rather, they argue that cooperation between federal and state agencies is essential to maintain public trust, particularly in communities already wary of immigration enforcement. Federal Response and Jurisdictional Limits Federal officials, for their part, maintain that the investigation falls squarely under federal jurisdiction. ICE operates as a federal agency, and shootings involving federal officers are typically reviewed internally and, when appropriate, by federal prosecutors or inspectors general. In statements released following the controversy, federal representatives cited legal restrictions that limit the sharing of evidence during an active investigation. They also stressed that premature disclosure could compromise witness testimony or investigative integrity. This explanation, while legally grounded, has done little to ease state frustrations. Critics argue that “ongoing investigation” has too often been used as a blanket justification for withholding information, even in cases where transparency could prevent misinformation and public unrest. Community Reaction and Public Trust The Minneapolis community has responded with a mix of concern, anger, and fatigue. For many residents, particularly in immigrant and marginalized communities, the shooting has reopened long-standing fears about aggressive enforcement tactics and lack of accountability. Community leaders and advocacy groups have called for the immediate release of non-sensitive evidence, arguing that transparency is a prerequisite for trust. Peaceful demonstrations and public forums have highlighted a broader demand: that no law enforcement agency, federal or otherwise, should be beyond scrutiny. Local officials echoed these concerns, noting that Minneapolis has spent years attempting to rebuild trust between residents and law enforcement. The perception that evidence is being withheld threatens to undermine that progress. Legal Implications of Denied Evidence From a legal standpoint, the state’s inability to access evidence raises complex questions. While federal agencies do have authority over their operations, states also have a responsibility to investigate deaths or injuries occurring within their borders. Legal experts suggest that this dispute could set a precedent. If states are routinely blocked from reviewing evidence in federal use-of-force cases, it may limit their ability to pursue independent inquiries or bring charges under state law when applicable. Some analysts believe the issue could ultimately be resolved in court, with judges determining whether the state has a legal right to access certain materials. Such a ruling could have national implications, influencing how future federal-state conflicts are handled. Political Dimensions of the Case The Minneapolis ICE shooting has also taken on a political dimension. Immigration enforcement remains a deeply divisive issue, and incidents like this tend to amplify existing ideological divides. State officials critical of federal immigration policies view the denial of evidence as symptomatic of a larger lack of accountability. Meanwhile, supporters of strict federal enforcement argue that state interference could hinder effective operations and put officers at risk. This political tension complicates the path forward. What might otherwise be a procedural disagreement risks becoming a symbolic battle over immigration, law enforcement authority, and states’ rights. What Happens Next? As of now, the investigation continues under federal oversight, while the state explores its legal options. Negotiations between state and federal officials have reportedly not been ruled out, suggesting that a compromise could still be reached. Potential next steps include limited evidence sharing under confidentiality agreements, congressional inquiries, or judicial review. Each option carries its own risks and consequences, both legally and politically. What remains clear is that public pressure is unlikely to fade. Minneapolis residents, like many Americans, are demanding clarity, fairness, and accountability in cases involving law enforcement use of force. A Broader Conversation About Accountability The Minneapolis ICE shooting is no longer just a single incident under investigation. It has become a lens through which broader issues are being examined: the balance of power between federal and state authorities, the limits of transparency, and the role of public oversight in a democratic society. Whether or not the state ultimately gains access to the evidence, the controversy has already sparked an important conversation. How that conversation translates into policy, practice, or reform remains to be seen, but its impact will likely extend far beyond Minneapolis. In the end, accountability is not only about assigning blame. It is about ensuring that systems function openly and fairly, especially when lives are affected. The outcome of this case may help determine how well those principles are upheld in the future.
By Saboor Brohi 3 days ago in Criminal
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.