The internal investigation moved into a conference room on the second floor, where Deputy Chief Bennett had assembled a small review team. The group included Lieutenant Price, an investigator from professional standards, a digital records specialist, and a department attorney.
No one was permitted to access the case file without logging the reason.
On the table lay three documents: the original dispatch record, the incident report, and the supplemental evidence log.
At first glance, they appeared ordinary.
The dispatch record showed initial contact at 9:47 p.m. The incident report listed 9:14 p.m. The supplemental log contained an entry indicating that a piece of evidence had been collected at 9:26 p.m., twenty-one minutes before the recorded first contact.
The sequence made no sense.
The records specialist, Priya Shah, explained that the system maintained an audit history of changes to critical fields. The original timestamp in the incident report had been entered at 10:18 p.m., then changed the following morning. The replacement value matched the earlier time of 9:14 p.m.
“Can we establish who made the change?” Bennett asked.
“The account credentials belong to Officer Mercer,” Priya replied. “But that alone does not prove he personally entered the change. We need to compare workstation access, badge records, and any available login data.”
The investigator from professional standards, Captain Elaine Foster, leaned forward.
“Does the audit history show a reason for the change?”
“No. The field was edited without a meaningful explanation. The system permits corrections, but this one should have included a documented reason.”
“Was the evidence log changed in the same session?”
Priya checked her notes.
“Not in the same session. The log was edited two days later from a shared records terminal. The entry time was changed, but the system retained the earlier version.”
Bennett studied the documents.
“So the evidence may have been collected at a different time than the current log indicates.”
“Correct,” Priya said. “But we cannot yet establish which time is accurate for every item.”
Captain Foster made a note.
“We need the original dispatch audio, the property receipt, the search-warrant return, and statements from everyone present during collection.”
The review team divided the tasks.
By noon, they had confirmed that the dispatch recording began at 9:47 p.m. The first clear radio transmission matched the digital record. A second officer who had accompanied Daniel during the operation recalled arriving at the location shortly before ten o'clock.
The evidence receipt, however, listed a collection time of 9:26 p.m.
When asked about the inconsistency, the second officer, Nathan Cole, said he had signed the receipt at the end of the operation and had not checked every time field.
“I trusted the report to be accurate,” he explained.
“Did you personally see Mercer collect the evidence at 9:26?” Foster asked.
“I saw him handle the bag later. I can't swear to the exact minute.”
“Did he tell you the time?”
“No.”
His statement did not resolve the discrepancy, but it narrowed the possibilities.
Meanwhile, Andre was interviewed again. He answered the questions about the restroom incident and was then asked to clarify why he had raised concerns about the report.
He explained that the original timestamp appeared inconsistent with the dispatch record and that the evidence log contained a sequence that seemed impossible.
“Did you accuse Mercer of fabricating evidence?” Foster asked.
“No.”
“Did you tell anyone you believed he had deliberately altered the report?”
“I said the discrepancy needed to be investigated. I didn't know who changed it or why.”
“Did Mercer threaten you because of the report?”
Andre thought carefully.
“He told me I should stop questioning his work. Later, he grabbed me and punched me. I can't prove the report caused the assault. I can tell you the argument immediately preceded it.”
Foster nodded.
“That distinction matters.”
After the interview, Andre returned to his temporary administrative assignment. He had been instructed not to contact witnesses or discuss the case outside authorized channels. He followed the instruction carefully, even when colleagues approached him in the corridor.
One officer whispered, “Everybody knows Mercer is finished.”
Andre stopped walking.
“No,” he replied. “Everybody knows there's an investigation.”
The officer looked embarrassed.
Andre continued toward the office.
He was not interested in replacing one premature judgment with another. He wanted the evidence examined properly, even if the final result was less dramatic than people expected.
Late that afternoon, Priya discovered another detail in the audit history.
A file containing the original evidence sequence had been exported to an external storage device shortly before the first timestamp was changed. The system recorded the export but did not identify the person who physically removed the device.
Bennett read the report in silence.
“Do we know what was on the device?”
“Not yet,” Priya answered. “The export record identifies the file name, but we need to determine whether the device was department-issued and whether a copy still exists.”
Captain Foster closed her notebook.
“Then that becomes our next priority.”
Bennett looked around the table.
“We are investigating an alleged assault, possible reporting irregularities, and a potentially unauthorized export. Keep those questions separate until the evidence connects them.”
Everyone agreed.
As the meeting ended, Lieutenant Price remained behind.
“Do you think Mercer knows how much we've found?” he asked.
Bennett glanced at the closed conference-room door.
“I think he knows enough to be worried.”
“And Mitchell?”
“He knows he reported a discrepancy. He doesn't know what the audit history will show.”
Price nodded.
For the first time, the case had moved beyond two officers accusing each other.
The records were beginning to tell a story of their own.