The answer raised another question. If Miller had acted independently, why had the FPI notification appeared so close to the time of the stop? If he had received information through a system, why was there no corresponding entry in the ordinary dispatch history?
The agents continued documenting the scene. They photographed the tire marks, recorded the distance between the vehicles, and noted where the conducted-energy weapon had been placed. A separate team member examined the patrol vehicle's recording equipment. The device appeared intact, but the status of the recording remained uncertain.
When asked to check the system, Miller claimed that the camera should have activated automatically when he turned on the emergency lights. The agent reviewed the equipment settings and found that automatic activation was configured, but that alone did not establish whether the relevant footage had been captured or preserved.
FPI AGENT: "The system is configured to activate with the emergency lights. We need to confirm the recording file exists and whether it includes the full encounter."
Officer Jack Miller: "It should be there."
FPI AGENT: "Then we will verify it."
Miller looked away again. The phrase should be there sounded less like confidence than hope.
Inside the FPI vehicle, Marcus received a notification that the original system had acknowledged their request. The source administrator had agreed to provide a limited metadata report, but access to the full record remained pending. Marcus downloaded the report and began reviewing the fields.
The report confirmed that the restricted entry had existed before the traffic stop. It also showed that the record had been accessed by an account associated with a regional law enforcement system. The account's user identity was masked, but the access time corresponded closely with the period when Miller's patrol vehicle was following Emily.
Marcus called Elena and Vale over.
FPI Agent Marcus Bell: "We have a new detail. The record was accessed through a regional law enforcement channel shortly before the stop."
Agent Elena Cross: "Can we identify the individual user?"
FPI Agent Marcus Bell: "Not from this report. The account is linked to a shared access gateway, and the user-level audit trail is still restricted."
Director Thomas Vale: "Does the report show what was viewed?"
FPI Agent Marcus Bell: "It confirms that the identity record was opened, but it doesn't expose the full contents."
Elena looked toward Miller. The officer stood several yards away, talking with another agent. He seemed to sense that the investigation had taken a new direction. His face had become pale, and he repeatedly glanced at the FPI vehicle.
Agent Elena Cross: "We need to establish whether Miller had access to that gateway."
FPI Agent Marcus Bell: "I'll check his agency's access permissions and request the corresponding logs."
Director Thomas Vale: "Do it. But don't assume that the access belongs to him just because he was on the road. We need a user-level match."
Marcus began the query. The system returned a list of agencies with permission to access the gateway. The regional highway patrol was among them, along with several other public agencies. That meant Miller's department had the technical ability to reach the system, but it did not establish whether he had personally opened Emily's record.
The distinction was important. A shared gateway could be accessed by multiple authorized users, and a record might be opened for reasons unrelated to a particular stop. Investigators would need the precise account, the request parameters, and the audit trail to determine who had accessed the information.
Emily listened as Elena explained that the team had found an access event associated with a law enforcement channel. She felt the implications immediately, but she tried not to jump ahead of the evidence.
Emily Carter: "Does that mean the officer knew who I was?"
Agent Elena Cross: "Not necessarily. It means a law enforcement channel accessed the record. We still need to identify the account and determine who was using it."
Emily Carter: "But the access happened before he stopped me."
Agent Elena Cross: "Yes. The timing is confirmed. The identity of the user is not."
Emily turned toward Miller. He was looking in their direction now, no longer pretending to ignore the discussion. Their eyes met briefly before he looked away.
Emily Carter: "I want to know whether he looked me up before he came to my window."
Agent Elena Cross: "So do we."
For the first time, Emily felt that her central question was being taken seriously. She had not imagined the aggression or the lack of explanation. Those events had happened in front of several agents, and the records were beginning to show that something had occurred before the officer approached her.
Yet she also knew that a suspicious timeline could be misleading. She had seen enough of the world to understand that people often connected events because they happened close together. She did not want the investigation to become another story built on assumptions. She wanted evidence that could survive scrutiny, whether it supported her suspicions or disproved them.
She returned to the email on her phone and read the message again. The financial services company had included a reference number at the bottom, along with a date and a short statement about identity verification. Emily copied the reference into her notes and gave it to Elena.
Agent Elena Cross: "Thank you. We'll document that number and determine what can be verified through the company."