As preparations for the hearing continued, the department reviewed the conduct of Carter and Turner. The review found that they had arrived during an active struggle and had initially perceived a potential threat to an officer. Their decision to draw their weapons was examined in the context of the information available to them at that moment.
The review also considered how they responded once the immediate confrontation was under control. Investigators noted that they had secured the scene, called a supervisor, and participated in the evidence-preservation process. Their initial interpretation had been incomplete, but the available evidence did not establish that they had knowingly participated in Hayes's alleged misconduct.
Carter later spoke with Daniel during a scheduled meeting.
OFFICER CARTER: "Chief, I've thought about what happened in the park. When we arrived, I believed we were stopping an attack on another officer. I didn't know what had happened before that."
DANIEL BROOKS: "I understand what you saw."
OFFICER CARTER: "I should have made sure we heard the full account as soon as the scene was secure."
DANIEL BROOKS: "That is an important lesson. When officers arrive in the middle of an incident, they have to distinguish what they personally observed from what someone else tells them."
OFFICER CARTER: "I won't forget it."
DANIEL BROOKS: "Good. But don't make this lesson about my identity. The next person you encounter may not be able to call the chief or request an independent review."
Carter listened without interrupting.
DANIEL BROOKS: "Every person deserves to have the facts examined. A uniform doesn't make someone incapable of being wrong, and an accusation doesn't make a civilian guilty."
OFFICER CARTER: "I understand."
Daniel hoped she did. He also knew that understanding a principle in a quiet office was easier than applying it in a tense situation. The real test would come the next time she arrived at a scene where the first account sounded convincing but the evidence had not yet been established.
The case against Hayes eventually reached court.
The prosecution presented the timeline of the park encounter, the body-camera recordings, the security footage, and Ethan Price's video. Margaret Ellis described seeing Hayes grab Daniel's jacket before the struggle moved to the grass. Ethan explained when he began recording and confirmed that the submitted file was the original video from his phone.
The digital evidence examiner described how the recordings had been preserved and compared. The laboratory findings established the nature of the substance in the bag, while the investigators explained why that result did not, by itself, establish who had placed it in Daniel's pocket.
The defense challenged the interpretation of the footage and argued that the camera angles did not conclusively show the alleged planting. Hayes maintained that he had discovered the bag during a lawful investigation and that Daniel had resisted his attempt to detain him.
The jury was required to evaluate the evidence, the witness testimony, and the competing explanations.
Daniel did not ask the jury to believe him because he was the Chief of Police. He did not use his office to influence the proceedings. He appeared as a witness and described the events as he remembered them, answering questions about what he had seen, what he had not seen, and why he believed the bag had been planted.
The prosecutor asked him whether he had known Hayes before the incident.
DANIEL BROOKS: "I had seen him in the course of my professional duties, but I had no personal dispute with him."
PROSECUTOR: "Did you have any reason to approach him that afternoon?"
DANIEL BROOKS: "No. I was sitting in the park using my phone. He approached me."
PROSECUTOR: "When did you first see the bag?"
DANIEL BROOKS: "When he held it up and said he had found it in my jacket."
PROSECUTOR: "Had you placed it there?"
DANIEL BROOKS: "No."
PROSECUTOR: "Why did you not immediately identify yourself as Chief of Police?"
DANIEL BROOKS: "At the beginning, I had no reason to think my title was relevant. I expected the officer to explain why he had stopped me and to handle the encounter according to procedure. Once the situation escalated, I was concerned that revealing my identity might change how people treated the allegation."
PROSECUTOR: "What did you want the investigation to establish?"
DANIEL BROOKS: "What actually happened. Not what someone assumed happened, and not what anyone wanted to be true."
The defense questioned Daniel about the physical struggle and the fact that the responding officers had seen him restraining Hayes on the ground. Daniel acknowledged that he had held Hayes's arm but explained that he had done so after the officer grabbed his jacket and attempted to force him down.