It also found that supervisors had sometimes closed complaints without documenting why certain evidence had not been collected.
Kessler was criticized for failing to establish a stronger review system.
He accepted responsibility for the department's administrative failures.
But the criminal investigation into Harlan continued separately.
The prosecutor's office eventually issued a written notice that it would not pursue the resisting-arrest allegation against Marcus.
The decision cited the available video, the body-camera recording, and the lack of evidence that Marcus had intentionally obstructed a lawful arrest.
The assault allegation was also dismissed.
Marcus received the notice while sitting at his parents' kitchen table.
He read it twice.
Then he placed it on the table.
Evelyn looked at him.
“Is it over?”
“The charges are dismissed.”
She covered her mouth.
Thomas sat across from them, his hands folded around a cup of tea.
For several seconds, nobody spoke.
Then Evelyn began to cry.
Marcus stood and embraced her.
Thomas looked down at the paper.
“I'm sorry,” he said again.
Marcus shook his head.
“Dad, we talked about this.”
“I know.”
“You didn't do anything wrong by needing help.”
Thomas nodded.
But the shame had not disappeared.
He had watched his son leave the house in handcuffs.
He had heard his wife begging the officer to help.
He had spent days wondering whether he would have survived if the ambulance had arrived later.
The dismissal of the charges did not erase those memories.
The department announced that Harlan would remain on administrative leave while the internal investigation continued.
The county also referred the matter to an outside prosecutorial authority to avoid any appearance that the sheriff's office was investigating one of its own employees without independent oversight.
Harlan hired an attorney.
He denied wrongdoing.
His attorney argued that the officer had been forced to make rapid decisions during a chaotic encounter and that the family footage did not capture every angle.
The attorney also argued that Marcus's military training made him physically capable of overpowering an officer.
Carter rejected that framing.
“Training does not establish aggression,” he said in a written response. “The relevant question is what the evidence shows the person actually did.”
Marcus refused to participate in the public argument.
He had no desire to explain his military career to people who had never met him.
The footage showed his hands raised.
It showed his attempts to reach his father.
It showed his restraint.
That was enough.
The internal hearing took place several months later.
Harlan sat at one end of a long conference table.
His attorney sat beside him.
Across the room were the investigators, department representatives, and a county-appointed hearing officer.
The evidence was presented in chronological order.
First came the dispatch recording.
Then the radio traffic.
Then the body-camera footage.
Finally, the unedited home security video.
The room remained silent as the footage played.
When Marcus said, “My father has a heart condition,” the hearing officer paused the recording.
“Was this statement included in your original report?” she asked Harlan.
“No.”
“Why not?”
“I didn't consider it relevant to the arrest.”
“Did you know the father had collapsed?”
“Yes.”
“Was that included?”
“It was in the medical response record.”
“That is not what I asked. Was it included in your narrative?”
Harlan looked toward his attorney.
His attorney answered that the report should be considered in its entirety.
The hearing officer repeated the question.
Harlan finally said no.
The video resumed.
It showed Marcus being pushed against the cruiser.
It showed the younger deputy looking toward Thomas.
It showed Harlan refusing to release Marcus immediately.
The hearing officer paused again.
“Did you consider whether the force used was necessary at that point?”
Harlan replied that he believed Marcus was a threat.
“Based on what?”
“He grabbed my wrist.”
“What happened immediately before that?”
Harlan said he could not remember every detail.
The investigator played the earlier section again.
The footage showed Harlan reaching toward Marcus first.
The room became quiet.
The hearing officer looked at him.
“Your report states that the subject initiated physical contact.”
Harlan said he believed that was accurate.
“Do you still believe that after watching this recording?”
His attorney objected to the question.
The hearing officer allowed Harlan time to consult with counsel.
He eventually answered.
“I stand by my actions.”
The internal review found that Harlan had violated department policy in several respects.
The findings included unnecessary use of force, failure to respond appropriately to a medical emergency, and inaccurate reporting.
The department also found that he had failed to properly document the sequence of events.
The sheriff announced that Harlan's employment was terminated.
The decision was not based on his years of service or the number of calls he had handled.
It was based on the evidence from the Reed incident and the department's conclusion that he had violated established standards.
Harlan appealed.
His attorney argued that the termination was excessive.
The county's review board upheld the decision.
The criminal investigation continued.
Months later, Harlan was charged with offenses related to the incident and the alleged falsification of official records.
The case was not presented as a simple disagreement between an officer and a family.
It centered on the recordings, the written reports, the sequence of force, and the officer's statements afterward.
The prosecution called Miller as a witness.
He described arriving at the driveway and seeing Marcus pressed against the cruiser.
He testified that Marcus had repeatedly asked for medical assistance.
He explained that he had seen Thomas collapse.
He also testified that Harlan had instructed him to focus on the arrest rather than the father.
Harlan's attorney challenged Miller's memory.
The attorney suggested that Miller had changed his account after learning that the family possessed video.
Miller acknowledged that he had watched the footage during the investigation.
But he insisted that his supplemental report reflected what he had witnessed.