“This body has neglected these children”
The council abdicates its responsibility toward the public will
I’m at the Dunkies on Wednesday afternoon after having picked up a landscaping shift with my buddy Tim (his company is called Loving Scapes and he’s great). I’m sweaty and beat and in need of some caffeine for the writing portion of the day. In the drive-through lane, my car idling as I wait for the legendarily slow service at the lower Grafton Street location, I hear a robotic female voice cut through the air as cop cruiser-blue lights flash in the corner of my eye.
“Loiterer detected,” the robot woman says, loud enough that it send echoes rippling back from the buildings across the street. “Please disperse. Authorities will be notified. Thank you for shopping at Cumberland Farms.”
It came from one of those new and increasingly common security towers with the trailer hitches. The most visible of them is outside the Park Ave Walgreens. This one is outside the Grafton Street Cumberland Farms.
The disembodied voice wafts through my window like a dystopian breeze. I can’t see the tower. Though I know it’s there, I’ve never heard it speak. I didn’t know it could “detect” loiterers. Can’t see the alleged loiterer, either. It’s possible the thing is malfunctioning and there isn’t one. But the message is obvious: To the owners of the Cumbies, the people who live around it are a threat. This is not a space you’re supposed to feel comfortable existing in for very long. But it’s also not one that warrants the expense of a human security guard. You get your slushie and you leave the premises and if you don’t, the robot woman in the tower will threaten to call the cops and flash lights at you.
I know this post is a day late. Big whoop. Bear got his nuts chopped clean off yesterday so the house was chaos. Now he looks like this for 10 days and he hates it so much.
Please subscribe :-)
Tuesday was the first city council meeting since July 16. It was awful, as I will describe at great length. Today we’re focused on the traffic violence element, as it’s the most pressing. In Sunday’s piece, I’ll go over the WPI drama component and a report the police filed on Shotspotter.
The council keeps doing nothing—a traffic violence timeline—remember to be respectful—Toomey’s weird little blame the victim moment—meet the Outdoor Cat—odds and ends
How dare you
At about 11:45 p.m. Tuesday night, City Councilor Etel Haxhiaj took the floor and held up a picture of Candice Asare-Yeboa, a five-year-old girl hit and killed by a driver on Stafford Street in 2022.
“I am going to bring Candice into the room today,” she said. “This child was supposed to be starting school this week. As tired as I am right now and as upset as I am that I can’t put my kids to bed, at least I get to go home to my two boys.”
Across the room, Councilor Kate Toomey was apparently asleep. Councilors Candy Mero-Carlson and Luis Ojeda, who would in a few minutes make it clear they took Haxhiaj’s comments as unwarranted personal attacks, appeared frustrated. Donna Colorio, the chairwoman of a subcommittee that has tied up a proposal to lower speed limits for almost nine months, looked dazed.
The moment was some five and a half hours into the meeting. Despite the dead and hospitalized children in the headlines this summer, and the dozens of speakers from the public earlier that night who made it clear traffic violence was the dominant issue on their minds, the council barely addressed it. Traffic violence was, at best, a third tier issue, behind WPI and trash bags. It was so little discussed because Donna Colorio used the power afforded to her to prevent a conversation from happening.
Hoarse with anger and on the verge of tears, Haxhiaj said she met with Candice’s mother earlier that day. She said the family hasn’t found justice for the killing of their daughter. She said they were traumatized, too afraid to walk on city streets. The city council has a responsibility here, to children like this and families like this, she said, and it has failed to fulfill it.
“This body has neglected these children,” she said.
At the beginning of the meeting, Mayor Joe Petty announced that Donna Colorio had “held” Haxhiaj’s resolution on traffic violence and the need for action, delaying it a week. Colorio did not explain why. Dozens of citizens then spoke in favor of a resolution that the council wouldn’t discuss.
When Haxhiaj took the floor just before midnight, she was technically speaking on another item, “held” in a similar fashion by Moe Bergman at the last meeting. Two meetings in a row the old guard of the council has sabotaged Haxhiaj’s effort to simply show the community that city hall takes this issue seriously.
To hold the resolution, with so many members of the public coming out to support it, is “shameful and it is neglectful,” Haxhiaj said.
“We spent hours talking about trash, but we don't have the courage to say on record that this is a public health emergency,” she said.
Her full comments are worth a watch.
To put a fine point on Haxhiaj’s frustration, which was well shared by public commenters (more on that later), it’s worth sketching a brief timeline of council (in)action and traffic violence year to date.
2024 traffic violence timeline
December, 2023 — The 25 mph proposal hits the city council and gets sent to Donna Colorio’s traffic and parking subcommittee, where it still sits. A bit ago I wrote a comprehensive history on the way Colorio has handled this proposal. This part is important to stress again:
The administration submitted this proposal last December. Since, there have been 90 accidents in the city involving pedestrians and cyclists. A normal council could have approved it by January, easily.
January 31 — First of five public hearings called for by Colorio takes place. Colorio signals her personal opposition.
She telegraphed her personal opposition in a series of statements thinly veiled as questions. She asked what’s to say people will follow the lower speed limit. She asked whether people will know that the speed limit is lower, saying she doesn’t personally know speed limits of roads she drives on. She warned about possible mass confusion among motorists. She asked if “we can enforce it.” She asked how many cities have proposed then rejected the idea.
April 21 — The fifth public hearing wraps. Over the course of the hearings, at least 21 residents speak in favor of the proposal and only five oppose. Colorio, unsatisfied with the lack of opposition, requests an online survey, and says she wants the results back before any further action is taken. It is a transparent move to delay the process. The city launches the survey a few days later.
May 22 — Eric Batista gives his State of the City address, specifically pointing to “traffic violence” as a key issue for his administration.
June 24 — A driver hits a one-year-old child on Lincoln Street. The child is rushed to the hospital and, as of my writing this, remains there. This marks the start of an exceptionally bloody summer for pedestrians.
June 25 — City council meets but doesn’t discuss traffic violence. Importantly, it’s the last meeting before the summer schedule, meaning it will be a few weeks until the next meeting on July 16.
June 27 — A driver kills 13-year-old Gianna Rose Simoncini on Belmont Street. She becomes the second child in the city killed by a driver in two years, following five-year-old Candice Asare-Yeboah’s death by car in April 2022. Asare-Yeboah’s death prompted the launch of the Vision Zero initiative, an overall plan to bring pedestrian deaths down to zero. The 25 mph speed limit is explicitly part of that overall plan, as explained by the city manager when he filed it in December.
July 12 — The city council agenda is published for the July 16 meeting. It includes an order from Haxhiaj to declare a public health and safety emergency.
July 16 — Moe Bergman holds Etel’s order, pushing any deliberation to the next meeting on Aug. 27. His stated concerns are the legal ramifications, but his real concerns are quite obvious, especially after the city solicitor explained on the floor that there were no legal issues. “I do wish under 10e that ‘vulnerable road users’ would have also included motorists,” Bergman said, missing the point completely, perhaps willfully so, in an effort to draw a parallel to the Mill Street drama.
July 16 — On the same day that Bergman prevents the council from declaring a public health crisis, a driver rams into a 54-year-old man at the intersection of Park and Pleasant Street, causing serious injury and hospitalization.
July 19 — A driver hits a 26-year-old man on a scooter then takes off. The man goes to the hospital with serious injuries. As of my writing, the driver remains at large, despite security camera footage of the crash released by the WPD.
July 29 — Another 13-year-old girl is hit by a car, this time on Shrewsbury Street. Her name is Ayuen Leet and she is still in a coma.
Aug. 1 — Batista and Mayor Joe Petty release a joint statement declaring a Road Safety and Traffic Violence Crisis—essentially circumventing the city council to make the declaration that Haxhiaj requested on July 16 and Bergman obstructed. In the statement, they specifically reference the 25 mph proposal, saying it will return from Colorio’s subcommittee “soon.” Colorio has thus far said nothing about bringing it to vote. Regardless of that fact, Batista and Petty call it one of several “initial actions that can be implemented rapidly.”
Aug. 5 — The driver who hit Ayuen Leet is issued a citation for operating to endanger, speeding, and failure to yield to a pedestrian in the roadway. A firsthand account of the crash notes there were no skid marks ahead of the collision. Investigators determin the crash was caused by excessive speed. It is the only such citation stemming from any of the brutal pedestrian crashes this summer, at least so far.
Aug. 11 — A driver hits a 40-year-old woman on Greenwood Street, resulting in hospitalization.
Aug. 20 — Donna Colorio makes her first public comment on the 25 mph proposal tied up in her committee. Speaking to StreetsBlog, she says, "I’m concerned that we are constantly getting criticized because we don’t involve the public, because we’re not being transparent. I want more."
Aug. 23 — Agenda is published for the council meeting on Aug. 27. It includes another order from Haxhiaj, this time in the form of a resolution: that “the council considers the death and injury of vulnerable road users ... a public health and safety emergency” and the council “continues to support the city manager’s commitment to eliminating traffic violence in our city by implementing vision zero policies,” that they “support expediting the adoption” of the 25 mph proposal, as well as the 20 mph safety zones, and that they support Complete Streets-style traffic calming. A symbolic vote, it’s merely intended to show the public the council is committed to taking corrective action. (Full text here.)
On the same agenda, the results of the survey Colorio asked for are made public. Just like at the hearings, the majority of survey respondents are in favor of the 25 mph proposal.
Aug. 25 — A driver hits an 80-year-old woman in a crosswalk on Airport Drive, resulting in serious injury. As I’m writing, the woman is still in the intensive care unit.
Aug. 27 — At the council meeting, Donna Colorio holds Haxhiaj’s resolution without explanation. Nevertheless, dozens of people show up to voice their support for it. Over an hour-and-a-half public comment period, the resolution is easily the most frequently discussed issue, and no one speaks in opposition.
Aug. 27 — On the same day that Colorio holds Haxhiaj’s resolution, a 33-year-old man is hit by a driver on Shrewsbury Street, a few blocks over from the spot another driver put Ayuen Leet in a coma in July. The man is apparently on life support. It becomes the second time this summer that a driver hits and hospitalizes a pedestrian on the same exact day that a city councilor delays action on traffic violence.
Aug. 28 — An agenda for a Sept. 4 traffic and parking meeting is finally posted. The 25 mph speed limit proposal is the only item.
Sept. 4 — The three-member traffic and parking subcommittee will vote on whether to send the 25 mph proposal back to the full council. The meeting starts at 4 p.m. and is open to public comment. The other two members are Khrystian King and Thu Nguyen, who are both on record as in favor of the proposal. Even if Colorio votes against it, the measure will advance 2-1 to the full council. Nothing about this political reality was any different in January. Colorio was always going to lose on this.
Sept. 10 — The next full city council meeting. Barring any further obstruction, the 25 mph proposal is slated for a vote. It’s looking like it will pass with either seven or eight votes, if it isn’t held under privilege.
To summarize: that’s one child killed, two children hospitalized, several adults hospitalized. Over the same period, negative two actions taken by the city council. They didn’t just do nothing, they went out of their way to do less than nothing. The mayor and city manager had to go around the council in order to do anything at all. They made promises to the public without knowing whether the city council would honor them.
Always remember to be respectful!
Presented two opportunities by Haxhiaj, a single councilor was allowed to unilaterally decide that the council would do nada, by way of an incontestable administrative hold and a summer schedule that saw only two meetings between June and September.
So that, in a nutshell, is the long, grim show which colored Haxhiaj’s comments Tuesday night. How could you not be frustrated? How could you not be on the verge of tears? What other word is there besides “negligence”?
“This is a shameful moment,” Haxhiaj said. “This is a shameful moment.”
Rather than owning up to it, councilors met Haxhiaj with self-righteous indignation.
District 4 Councilor Luis Ojeda surprisingly was the first to do so. He focused not on pedestrian accidents and garish deaths and near fatal injuries, but on Haxhiaj’s word choices.
“I sit here with my heart racing because the word ‘neglect’ was used,” Ojeda said. “I just want it to be known... I’m not neglecting.”
Haxhiaj’s comments were essentially a plea for the council to do anything to respond to the problem. To take it as a personal attack betrays a lot about what it is a person thinks they’re doing on the council. Candy Mero-Carlson took Ojeda’s consternation and kicked it up a notch.
“I’m gunna say to people, think about what I've been through in District 2,” she said.
As if Haxhiaj is only concerned about children killed within the arbitrary boundaries of her council district. Deeply insulting. And, on top of that, the rhetorical need to center herself: ‘What I have been through.’ Pure, narcissistic evil.
Like Haxhiaj’s, Carlson’s full comments are worth a watch, but for the opposite reason:
Councilor George Russell took it upon himself to twist Haxhiaj’s words into a different meaning altogether: that the 25 mph proposal was the only thing she wants to see happen. That reducing the speed limit citywide was some panacea in her imagination, despite the fact her resolution clearly says otherwise.
“The narrative in this community that somehow we’re just going to take one vote and cure all these problems is just not accurate,” Russell said.
It’s not one vote. The community wants a vote. Just one vote at all please. The council has so far refused to take that one single vote.
Haxhiaj called for the city council to find a newfound courage to act boldly in the face of this nightmarish crisis. George Russell‘s pushback showed that the majority of the council is uninterested in bold decisions and plenty comfortable using bad faith arguments to wriggle out of having to make one.
Counselor King was the only one to publicly back up Haxhiaj Tuesday night. He also criticized Colorio for delaying the 25 mph proposal and said the council should just vote on it. Except for King, the councilors who spoke took issue with her demanding they do better.
Ever the narcissist, Candy Mero-Carlson repeated several times that she works hard. At one point, she detailed what that work includes.
“There isn't any one of us who hasn't been working diligently,” said Mero-Carlson. “Asking for reports and doing our homework and raising funds.”
Work, to her, is asking city staffers to write reports for her, reading said reports (citation needed), and sharing links to online fundraisers for the victims.
That is not work.
The way the conversation played out, depressing as it was, proved illustrative. It was like watching in real time a political culture reflexively reject a moral imperative.
It was similar to the school committee conversation about superintendent Rachel Monárrez’ evaluation a few weeks ago, in that way. At that meeting, Monárrez and Sue Mailman challenged the city’s political culture by directly calling out Binienda and her cronies for being a problem on purpose. From my post on that:
In Worcester politics, it’s pretty unusual to hear officials speak directly to the interpersonal tensions. It’s always just under the surface, apparent to those who know they exist but painfully obscured in vague rhetoric. It’s baked into the culture that what you really mean is not what you say. I remember distinctly how bizarre it sounded when I first started covering Worcester government. It’s very weird.
Mailman and Monárrez both crossed that strange, unspoken line. Doing so was a moral choice. It was more important for them to tell the truth than to play the agreed-upon rhetorical game. That seemingly small decision was a major violation of the norms of Worcester politics.
When Haxhiaj called the council negligent, she crossed the same line.
On the Worcester city council, you do not say what you mean in clear terms. You do not tell an unvarnished truth. You obscure what you mean between the lines. Vague speechifying that sounds like something but means nothing. You act on how you feel via petty procedural moves like holding items.
Candy Mero-Carlson defended her right to do those petty moves. On the holding-under-privilege tactic so often employed, Mero-Carlson said: “Nobody likes it when it happens but it is our right.” Also: “Why is it good sometimes and sometimes it's not?”
By reducing Haxhiaj’s comments to mere personal attack, Mero-Carlson, Ojeda and Russell showed contempt for the moral imperative she expressed. Unable to operate on her level, they had to reduce what she said down to something that made sense on theirs. That’s especially evident in this quote from Mero-Carlson: “The one thing we should always remember is be respectful. I’m not neglectful to my district.”
Be respectful to the other councilors by never challenging them directly. The public, however? No need there. When the community demands bold action, the city council doens’t have to show the basic respect of entertaining the idea. In defending themselves against the claim of negligence, they didn’t offer a vision for what they felt negligence would consist of. They just said negligence is a mean word to throw around and they don’t deserve it.
But how is it not? How is it not negligence when you have an hour and a half of public comment that almost completely consisted of pleading from the community to do something—anything at all—to address the traffic violence crisis and you don’t even talk about it until midnight? How is it not negligence in the face of that to do the opposite of what the community is asking for. To push off taking any action for another week without saying why. Without feeling like the community deserves an explanation.
Many people pointed this out during public comment. The best comment, I thought, was from Patty Huzar, a parent of a young child and resident of Candy-Mero Carlson’s District 2.
“Maybe it’s symbolic but it costs you nothing and it shows that you care about the public’s safety,” she said.
She quoted from one of Donna Colorio’s 2023 campaign mailers. “It says ‘Colorio advocates for safe neighborhoods and quality of life.’ The 25 mph speed limit has been delayed in Councilor Colorio’s committee for months. That means you have delayed making my neighborhood safe and delayed improving the quality of life for my daughter and all the other vulnerable residents of this city.”
She addressed the fact that Colorio held Haxhiaj’s resolution. “Tonight you have delayed a simple vote of support on the 25 mph change without any explanation.”
Then the kicker:
“I can’t wait to see what half truths will appear on your mailers the next time you’re up for election.”
Chef’s kiss right there. No notes.
The normative behavior on the city council is to never show the community the simple respect of explaining themselves. They treat people who want to see them be leaders with visible disdain. ‘How dare you call upon me to lead.’ ‘How dare you suggest there is a moment in front of me and I have to meet it!’ ‘How dare you suggest that I rise to any occasion!’
Instead of living up to such an expectation, they balk. Put their backs up. Take it personal. Per the agreed-upon rules, it is offensive when the community asks them to do something with their power.
On paper, the city council reflects the public will. In practice, the council deflects it. So much of the political culture of that board is built around the act of politely telling the public they shouldn’t bother trying to participate. An important element of that set of norms is the idea that they cannot be challenged directly for failing to do something. That’s not “respectful.”
I’m watching the show Your Honor on Netflix currently. I’m reminded of an exchange in the first season finale. A detective storms into the back chamber of a courtroom and confronts a corrupt judge about a story of his that doesn’t add up.
The judge says, “Look, I don’t know what you think you’re doing, detective, but you come in here, and you start interrogating me? I don’t have to take this from you.”
Detective: “Yeah, I know that sound.”
Judge: “What sound?” And then he gets angry. “What fucking sound?”
Detective: “And after a lifetime in a courtroom, I think you do, too. Anger and righteousness combined? That’s how liars hide their lies.”
Anger and righteousness combined: The judge says I don’t have to take this from you. The city councilor says how dare you say that I’ve been negligent.
Help this newsletter continue to exist!
Just a reminder that my work on here, as well as Shaun’s, Aislinn’s, Liz’s, and others, is only possible because of the Worcester Sucks readers that pony up paid subscriptions. If you can swing $5 a month, our little attempt at a truly independent local outlet thanks you kindly for its continued existence!
One-time tips are nice too. All goes to the same place.
If anyone out there wants to make a larger, tax-deductible contribution, we have a foundation for that! Send me a line at billshaner@substack.com.
Sharing this newsletter with a friend or two is a huge help as well.
Toomey’s weird little victim blaming moment
Earlier in the meeting, Kate Toomey, the councilor who was apparently sleeping through Haxhiaj’s comments, stood up to comment on the pedestrian deaths situation with a bit of thinly veiled racism and/or xenophobia, as well as out-and-out victim blaming. She regaled the council with a personal anecdote in which she made it clear she was the protagonist.
“Yesterday had I not been very cognizant and aware of what was going on with kids going back to school and everything I had two incidences (sic) in the same block. Where a woman had dropped off her child walked across the street with her head in her phone. Did not look up. Did not look sideways or whatever. Walked right in front of me.
Had I not been aware, that could have been a bad thing.
Same block. Another woman with a toddler and two young children and I assume a partner walked across the street. Did not look left, did not look right. Just walked right out into the street.”
And then, her hypothesis:
“We have a lot of folks that are new to our city who have not been informed of the rules of the road and safety.”
Translation: the immigrants don’t understand how afraid they should be of Worcester drivers.
By the way, how did she glean, from behind the windshield of her car, that these people were immigrants? Hmmmm. Three guesses.
Her plan:
“And so one of the things I want to do is make sure we’re informing every child and every family what appropriate behavior is when crossing streets. Stop, look, and listen.”
Translation: these simple people need to be versed in the more advanced ways of our superior society. We need missionaries to enter these communities preaching the good word of “drivers will kill you.”
“We need to make sure education goes both ways.”
Of course Toomey hasn’t proposed any education for drivers. But it definitely goes both ways. Sure thing.
She was the hero for not hitting those people with her car—very cognizant!—and if they’d known better like us natives, they wouldn’t have been anywhere near the road. We here in the USA know the roads are for cars and cars only and all others are to be blamed for their injuries or deaths.
Just so shameful and embarrassing. We deserve better than what we’re getting on this city council.
Outdoor Cat!
In Shaun’s last Bad Advice, he threw out a new idea for a Worcester Sucks mascot.
ACAB Smiley is up there. I also can’t get the image out of my head of former City Manager Ed Augustus calling Bill Shaner an outdoor cat to his face. So maybe an outdoor cat would be good for us too.
So the lovely and enterprising Travis Duda took it upon himself the next morning to drop this gem into the group chat. “I liked your mascot article, Shaun. It inspired today's warm up project.”
Instant winner, I think!
So then I show Katie and she goes what if it’s smoking a cig and I send that note back to Travis and...
Ahhhh even better!!
“I think the cig is a great addition,” Travis says. “It makes the cat look like it knows more than me.”
It also makes him look stoked to be pissed off, which is appropriate.
Between Shaun’s column and Travis’ graphic design work (@hunchbackgraphics) and my being roasted by the former city manager this is an example of local media coalescing around a vibe to beautiful results.
More on the “outdoor cat” story: It was in the early days of the Beer Garden (rest in piss) and I was there in my capacity as a Worcester Magazine reporter covering some bullshit event that brought out the city hall suits. I imposed myself on a circle of small talkers that included Sarah Connell and Jake Sanders and I think Ché Anderson maybe and of course Ed Augustus. Members of the “inner circle” if you will.
I spoke up, sharing my opinion on something or other. It was probably contrarian just knowing myself but I can’t remember what exactly I said. Augustus responded quickly, in his dry affect, “Well, you’re more of an outdoor cat.” And everyone laughed and laughed at my stinky ass there among all the well-heeled professionals in suits with my dirty jeans and flannel and beat up shoes. I laughed too. You do have to hand it to the guy. It was a sick burn.
And history since then has shown the assessment to be more accurate than he could have known. That was a few years before I launched Worcester Sucks and got to really show Augustus et al. what “outdoor cat” means. I do not think the word Augustus would use for me now would be quite so endearing. Nor do I think he’d entertain my presence in a conversational grouping at a yuckity yuck event.
Luckily for both of us, I make my own schedule and don’t have to go to those fuckin’ snooze fests anymore.
Anyway, might see this on some merch soon!1
Odds and ends
Thanks for reading yet another of my postings. Hope you liked it! If you didn’t, leave a comment.
Another pitch for helping us build this newsletter into an enduring, fun, and interesting local outlet in the shit-filled shallow sea that is local journalism.
Few more things...
Great article in The Appeal about the already-mounting ramifications of the Supreme Court’s homelessness decision:
In the two months since Grants Pass, at least 23 municipalities, including La Crosse, have passed or proposed new camping bans that levy the possibility of fines, tickets, or jail time against their homeless residents, according to The Appeal’s review of local news coverage. This count does not include cities or jurisdictions in California, where the ruling has emboldened Gov. Gavin Newsom to launch an aggressive statewide sweep on unhoused residents as new bans emerge across the state. In addition, a handful of city and state measures that had faced legal challenges before the Grants Pass ruling have now gone into effect or may soon.
Friend of the newsletter Miles Howard wrote a great analysis of our state’s lack of swimming holes and public pools for the Boston Globe. The piece blends climate change analysis with public policy and also does the most dangerous thing: discussing how other states are doing better than Massachusetts. Did you know New York is investing $300 million in public swimming infrastructure? I didn’t.
The firefighters and the city have finally reached a collective bargaining agreement.
Stop & Shop is still going to close the Lincoln Street store despite the city asking them politely not to.
Yet another new, deadly cutting agent has been found in the local drug supply, resulting in more overdoses. This time, it’s a veterinary sedative called medetomidine.
The Caribbean Carnival went off without a hitch this year and it looked awesome. Bummed I couldn’t make it, but Jenn Gaskin’s statement is a heartwarming read.
This dashcam footage of a car crash in Webster Square is hilarious.
Like I said at the top: Sunday’s piece will get into the WPI stuff as advanced by the council on Tuesday and a new ShotSpotter report from the WPD.
Talk then!
Oh! Nick Cave’s new album Wild God is out today. Bumping it for the first time now and so far so very good.
If you’re waiting on a merch order currently please be patient with me and also I’m sorry for the delay. Merch is always that bottom thing on a given day’s to-do list and I’m just one little guy.
The video of the Toomey moment is going around and apparently she wasn’t sleeping, she was sitting back and rolling her eyes after playing on her phone for a bit and showing it to Candy. https://www.instagram.com/reel/C_TJHzSuCq9/