Amara looked away.
The investigation was moving in a direction she had not expected. The system record had not proved that she planted the device, but it had also failed to establish that David knowingly possessed it. The footage showed him remaining calm and asking for documentation, while the evidence-handling record lacked a verified photograph of the device in its original position.
The supervisor therefore ordered a formal review of the inspection procedure and a separate assessment of Amara's conduct.
Kofi was interviewed privately.
He explained where he had been standing, what he had observed, and which parts of the search he could not see clearly. He admitted that he had initially hesitated to challenge Amara because she was more experienced and senior to him.
Officer Kofi: "I did not see the exact moment she removed the device. I should have made that clear from the beginning instead of allowing the conversation to become an argument about whether the passenger was being difficult."
Investigator: "Did David attempt to interfere with the search?"
Officer Kofi: "No. He stayed behind the line. He asked questions, but he did not touch the evidence or threaten either of us."
Investigator: "Did you observe any physical contact?"
Officer Kofi: "No physical contact occurred during the incident I witnessed."
The statement was added to the file.
Amara provided her own account separately. She maintained that she had discovered the device during the search and believed it required further investigation. However, she could not provide an independent witness who had clearly seen the device in its original location before it was removed.
She also acknowledged that she had not completed the evidence entry before the confrontation escalated.
That omission did not prove that she had deliberately planted the device, but it weakened the reliability of the original account and demonstrated why complete documentation was necessary.
The airport's internal review team reached a preliminary conclusion: the available evidence did not establish that David knowingly carried the electric stun device, and the inspection record was insufficient to support a final accusation against him.
The matter involving the device was referred for further assessment under the airport's standard procedures. The team also recommended additional training for officers on evidence handling, documentation, and communicating with passengers during disputed inspections.
Amara was temporarily removed from independent secondary screening duties while her conduct was reviewed.
When Diallo informed David of the preliminary findings, he listened carefully.
Supervisor Diallo: "The review has not established that you knowingly carried the device. The available record is insufficient to support that conclusion. The device will remain subject to the appropriate evidence assessment, but you will not be treated as having committed an offense solely because it was found during this inspection."
David Okafor: "Does that mean I can continue my journey?"
Supervisor Diallo: "Yes. Your immediate inspection has been concluded, and your belongings can be returned after the final inventory is completed."
David looked at the suitcase.
For hours, he had stood in the same area, watching strangers discuss his belongings as though he had no right to ask how an unexplained object had entered them. Now, at last, he could collect his things and leave.
But he was not interested only in getting to his gate.
David Okafor: "I also want to make a formal complaint about how I was treated."
Supervisor Diallo: "You are entitled to submit a complaint through the airport's review process. I will provide the incident reference and the instructions for requesting the records that can legally be released to you."
David Okafor: "Please include my request for the complete relevant surveillance footage to be reviewed."
Supervisor Diallo: "It is already recorded in the incident file."
Diallo handed him the reference information and confirmed that his statement had been saved. She also explained that some technical records might not be released directly because they contained internal security information, but they would remain available to authorized investigators.
David accepted the documents.
He had not received every answer, and the investigation had not established precisely how the device entered his suitcase. But the accusation had not been treated as proven merely because an officer had made it.
That was an important difference.
Before David left, Kofi approached him near the edge of the inspection area.
Officer Kofi: "I want to apologize for not speaking more clearly earlier. I should have focused on documenting what I actually saw instead of worrying about how Officer Ndlovu would react."
David studied him for a moment.
David Okafor: "The important thing is that you told the truth when you were asked."
Officer Kofi: "I should have done that from the beginning."