As we continue our coverage of the Grant Solomon case, Anglican Watch continues to get questions about the identity of the confidential informant behind the arrest of Grant’s mother, Dr. Angie Solomon (Angie). While law enforcement has not identified the informant, the following are our thoughts on who this person may be and their possible motives.
The trust factor
For starters, many have identified a key issue in the matter, which is that Angie trusted no one. Thus, we can safely say that the informant is someone Angie knew and trusted.
That’s a painful observation.
In Angie’s case, her son Grant died under questionable circumstances that just don’t add up. Her daughter, Gracie, alleges that her father, Angie’s former husband Aaron, abused her, both sexually and otherwise. Angie herself asserts that Aaron abused her. Multiple people allege that Aaron emotionally and physically abused Grant and his sister.
To be clear, we find the allegations of abuse credible.
Further, we are appalled that the Tennessee courts didn’t so much as lift a finger in response to the urging of the guardian ad litem in the Solomons’ divorce, who asked the courts to scrutinize Aaron’s conduct.
Thus, the betrayal of Angie’s trust by someone, almost certainly a trusted insider, is beyond loathsome. Indeed, it bespeaks a deeply troubled and unscrupulous person who is beneath contempt. How could any rational actor do that to someone who just lost a child and is struggling to get by?
That factor — the role of trust and those whom Angie was willing to allow access to her — also makes for a very small pool of candidates as the “confidential informant.”
Indeed, beyond her daughter Gracie, who is profoundly traumatized by her mother’s arrest, there are only a handful of people with regular access to Angie. And the informant clearly is not Melanie Hicks, who has gone above and beyond to support Grant, Gracie, and Angie.
So, who does that leave? We’ll leave it to others to answer that question, but suffice it to say, it’s a damned small group.
Mental health issues
Earlier, we alluded to the ethical issues of the “confidential informant.” But there’s more to that issue than meets the eye, as we believe that anyone capable of such egregious behavior likely is a very troubled soul.
How do we reach that conclusion? The answer is simple: People with a healthy sense of self don’t throw their friends under the bus. Nor do they display duplicity in their dealings with others.
As a result, we’re prepared to bet that whoever the informant is, s/he suffers from mental health issues, possibly rooted in trauma.
Of course, the possibility of mental health issues tempers our consternation at the shocking lack of a moral compass on the part of the “confidential informant.” But it doesn’t give them a pass, as even a very troubled person can choose right over wrong.
Moreover, if the informant does have mental health issues, they may, as we discuss below, have been acutely vulnerable to being co-opted by a third party with nefarious motives.
Entrapment
Of course, some will argue, “But how is it ethical to try to kill your ex?” The answer is that it’s clearly not ethical to seek the death of any human being.
But, like much in life, answers are rarely clear-cut.
Indeed, we’ve worked with many people, including immediate family members, who have lost loved ones amidst unspeakable tragedy. In every case, even the most solidly rational people sometimes slip into less rational, dark places.
For example, this author’s mother, when a son died unexpectedly in the mid-1990s, was convinced for a time that hospital officials had a hand in the death of her son, who died of a traumatic brain injury.
To be clear, there was no evidence to support her conclusion. And she quickly moved past that point in the grieving process.
The point is that the human mind is a tricky place, and it does what it needs to in order to process trauma. When the trauma is deep and searing, people can make bad decisions. They can also easily be exploited by persons they trust.
Thus, the worst thing that can happen is for someone, as we suspect occurred here, to start pitching a bad idea. As in, “Hey, I know someone who can take care of this for you. He can make Aaron go away.” In a situation like that, a person in the depth of profound grief may make poor choices that they would not otherwise make. And in that case, the situation becomes one of entrapment.
Indeed, if that is what the confidential informant did, there is a special place in hell for them (although, to be clear, we don’t believe in a literal hell.)
And we hope that the courts will consider that, one way or another, Angie has been in a place of profound vulnerability following Grant’s death. This vulnerability, combined with the continuing unwillingness of law enforcement to investigate Gracie’s allegations of abuse, would make for a perilous situation for any parent who loves her children.
In other words, we think entrapment is highly likely, and we expect details will come out at trial.
The potential role of Aaron Solomon
Another wrinkle in this matter is the potential role of Aaron Solomon in Angie’s arrest.
To be clear, Aaron is a sneaky little weasel. In our estimation, he’s also a narcissist and a sociopath.
And to be clear: This is a man who was even willing to lie at his son’s funeral, where he told a grieving congregation that he regularly played ball with Grant. Not only was that a lie, but by all reports, Grant loathed his father.
That begs the question: Why conclude that Aaron may be involved?
Well, there are two issues at hand. First, Aaron showed up at last week’s bail reduction hearing, where he appeared to sit with his attorney. That begs the question: If you’re divorced, and you’re not there to support Gracie — which clearly was not the case — why show up at all? More to the point, why bring your attorney? What is his motive?
Second, if there is one thing we have learned in covering the Solomon case, it’s that if something smells bad, Aaron’s somewhere not far behind the scenes. And we suspect that, like many emotional vampires, Aaron is adept at sniffing out the weaknesses in others and playing those factors to his advantage.
Thus, given the rank odor surrounding the role of the “confidential informant,” we expect Aaron to emerge, probably sooner rather than later.
So, what specifically might Aaron’s role be in this putrid mess?
Our hunch is that he co-opted the informant. Whether he dug up dirt from the person’s past, lured them into doing something illegal and then used that information, or paid them off, we’re prepared to bet Aaron had a hand in this. (If it’s a payoff, look for sudden, unexplained purchases inconsistent with that person’s known income or other indicia of new-found wealth.)
After all, who else would have it in for Angie? It’s not like she holds vast wealth, owns valuable assets, or has done anything to anyone. Indeed, our experience is she’s consistently kind to others, even when it’s not in her best interest to be kind.
So, what would anyone gain by setting Angie up? And why would anyone do so absent an external, third-party incentive?
The only answer we can see is that, right behind the scenes, Aaron is hard at it, working to cause trouble for Angie.
Possible future problems for the informant
But if the so-called “confidential informant” did, in fact, work with Aaron to set Angie up, they need to understand that Aaron is unlikely to stop the games any time soon.
Indeed, it’s a safe bet that if Aaron is behind this, he’ll eventually decide to sideline any possible threat to his reputation from the informant. Whether it’s by reporting the informant to law enforcement for some past misdeed, setting the informant up in a criminal case, or something else, we’re confident that the informant will not be left free to tell tales about Aaron’s role in this matter.
Nor should we forget that Aaron runs in neo-Nazi, Christian nationalist circles. Indeed, Steve Berger is an avowed dominionist, so let’s not kid ourselves about the lengths anyone in this group will go to in order to obtain power.
Even if Aaron isn’t part of this putrid mix — and we highly doubt he isn’t — there’s the practical matter of the informant’s reputation in the community.
Simply put, we cannot imagine that life in Tennessee, or anywhere else, is going to be particularly pleasant for the a-hole that set up a grieving mother for criminal charges. And sooner or later, that person’s identity will emerge. In fact, their voice already has been heard in the recordings played during the recent bail reduction hearings.
Indeed, even the most hard-line, law-and-justice sort is going to have empathy for a mother whose son died in questionable circumstances and whose daughter alleges her father sexually abused her.
Thus, we predict, at best, a difficult time with employment, social connections, and other issues for the “confidential informant.” At worst, if the informant was colluding with Aaron, we would not be surprised if they were, like Grant, to meet a mysterious and untimely end. It’s simply not safe to deal with someone who evinces the conduct we have seen from Aaron over the past several years.
Let’s just hope that, whoever the informant is, they have the perspective to recognize the difficult situation in which they have placed themselves and respond accordingly.
Silver linings
There may, however, be a silver lining in all of this. Regardless of how the criminal case against Angie goes, the headlines this situation has garnered will make it increasingly difficult for authorities to ignore the allegations Gracie has made against Aaron.
To be clear, the vast majority of child sex abuse claims brought forth by minors are accurate.
Moreover, Gracie is, in our experience, a credible witness.
Additionally, we note the multiple indicia of deception on Aaron’s part, including the numerous lies he told at Grant’s funeral and the questionable circumstances around the whereabouts of Grant’s cell phone on the day after his death.
Further, we have received multiple reports from various sources that Aaron accesses child porn. While we are unable to verify these claims independently, we have heard them often enough to consider them worthy of investigation by law enforcement. Further, if these claims are accurate, they make it all the more likely that Gracie indeed was sexually abused.
And, of course, at age 18, Gracie has 15 years to sue Aaron over her allegations of abuse.
That said, memories become cloudy with time, and witnesses die or move away, so Gracie would be smart to bring any claims sooner rather than later.
Our hunch is that, no matter how Angie’s criminal case plays out, Aaron is in for some rough sailing over the next few years. And we suspect that plenty of people would be willing to help fund any litigation Gracie might choose to bring.
In closing, we are hoping that Angie will post bond on Monday, May 5. If she does, we will report details as quickly as possible.
Leave a Reply