The access log showed that another employee's credentials had been used.
The following morning, the original transfer receipt was moved to an administrative archive.
A replacement copy appeared in the evidence folder.
Later, the confidential informant file was moved to a different storage location without the required approval.
The database was then changed to reflect the new location.
When the federal investigation requested access to the original records, the department initially could not locate them.
And when Agent Carter arrived, the first officer she encountered attempted to prevent her from meeting the commander despite her verified appointment and official credentials.
The investigation had begun with one missing file.
It had uncovered a much wider pattern.
Three days later, Lieutenant Collins was formally interviewed by the independent review team.
This time, the questions were more specific.
James Walker: "Lieutenant Collins, did you authorize the movement of the September transfer receipt?"
Lieutenant Collins: "I don't recall authorizing the movement of an original document."
James Walker: "The system identifies your account as the source of the authorization."
Lieutenant Collins: "Other employees had access to the operations workstation."
James Walker: "Did you share your account credentials?"
Collins paused.
Lieutenant Collins: "I don't believe so."
James Walker: "Did you instruct Thomas Reed to locate the original receipt?"
Lieutenant Collins: "I may have asked him to review an administrative record."
James Walker: "Did you ask him to remove it?"
Lieutenant Collins: "No."
Walker placed the preserved request form on the table.
James Walker: "This document carries your handwritten authorization."
Collins looked at it.
Lieutenant Collins: "That appears to be my signature."
James Walker: "Why did you request the original document after the department had received a preservation instruction?"
Lieutenant Collins: "I was trying to resolve an inconsistency."
James Walker: "What inconsistency?"
Collins did not answer immediately.
James Walker: "Did you know that the original signature did not belong to Detective Michael Grant?"
Lieutenant Collins: "No."
James Walker: "Did you know that the replacement copy contained a different signature?"
Lieutenant Collins: "No."
James Walker: "Did you authorize anyone to create the replacement copy?"
Collins shifted in his chair.
Lieutenant Collins: "I don't remember."
James Walker: "Did you have any involvement in moving the confidential informant file?"
Lieutenant Collins: "No."
Walker opened another folder.
James Walker: "The recovered database shows that the file was moved through your account."
Collins looked toward his representative.
For the first time, he appeared unable to maintain his usual composure.
Lieutenant Collins: "I would like to review the records before answering further questions."
James Walker: "That request will be recorded. The interview will pause here."
The investigation team ended the session.
Collins was not permitted to access the evidence systems while the review continued.
The department's leadership also placed him on temporary administrative leave, following the required procedures.
Officer Brooks was reassigned away from visitor security duties pending the review of his conduct.
The department issued a written notice confirming that no employee was permitted to interfere with witnesses or alter statements.
Captain Mitchell personally met with the staff.
He did not name anyone as guilty.
He did not announce conclusions that had not yet been reached.
Instead, he explained that the department was cooperating with an independent investigation and that all employees were expected to provide accurate information.
He also made clear that retaliation against anyone who reported concerns would not be tolerated.
Some employees were relieved.
Others were frightened.
A few were angry that the department's internal problems had become public knowledge.
But the most important change was that people were finally allowed to speak openly.
Sarah Williams submitted her complete statement.
Peter Evans provided his original message recording Brooks' attempt to influence his report.
Thomas Reed handed over the documents and communications he had preserved.
Mark Sullivan supplied the earlier complaint and the emails he had saved before resigning.
The independent team collected each item and verified its authenticity.
Meanwhile, the federal protection team continued working with the confidential informant.
The person was moved to a secure location while investigators assessed whether the warning message had come from someone connected to the department.
The message itself was traced through a separate legal process.
It did not immediately identify the sender, but the investigation established that it had been sent using a device associated with a person connected to the financial fraud network.
That discovery opened another line of inquiry.
The federal team began examining whether someone inside Westbridge had shared confidential information with individuals outside the department.
The case expanded beyond evidence tampering.
It now involved possible obstruction of justice, unauthorized disclosure of protected information, falsification of official records, and interference with an active investigation.
Weeks passed.
The investigation continued through interviews, document examinations, and technical analysis.
The original transfer receipt was examined by a forensic document specialist.
The examination found that the signature on the replacement copy had been added after the original document was created.
The paper and ink analysis also showed differences between the original and the replacement.