BROOKS: "Miller's body camera appears to have stopped recording before the physical confrontation."
Marcus remained silent for a moment.
MARCUS: "At what time?"
BROOKS: "The device log shows that the recording ended shortly before the reported recovery of the packet."
MARCUS: "Was the camera manually switched off?"
BROOKS: "We haven't established that. The device could have malfunctioned, but the timing is unusual."
MARCUS: "Preserve the device logs and any maintenance records. Don't assume the cause until it's verified."
BROOKS: "That's what we're doing."
Marcus thanked him and ended the call.
The missing portion of the recording did not prove deliberate interference. Equipment failed, batteries drained, and devices sometimes malfunctioned.
But the timing created another question.
If the body camera had stopped recording just before the packet appeared, the investigation needed to determine why.
Marcus added the issue to his notes and sent Evelyn a brief update.
An hour later, she called him into a secure meeting room.
The original paper inventory had arrived.
It sat inside a clear evidence bag on the table, accompanied by photographs of the storage box, the mismatched seal numbers, and the signatures of the people who had handled it.
The independent custodian, a middle-aged man named Peter Lawson, explained the procedure used to retrieve the box.
PETER: "The container was photographed in place. The label was documented before removal. The seal was intact, although the number differs from the digital entry."
MARCUS: "Has the discrepancy been recorded?"
PETER: "Yes. The original label has not been altered."
Evelyn looked at the documents.
EVELYN: "Can we inspect the contents?"
PETER: "Once the authorization is confirmed."
He checked the paperwork, verified the approval, and documented the time.
Only then did he open the evidence bag.
Inside was a thin folder containing several inventory sheets, transfer receipts, and handwritten notes.
Marcus did not touch the documents directly.
He leaned forward to examine the first page.
The handwriting was faded but legible.
The original inventory contained a list of property recovered during several separate operations. Each item had a corresponding reference number, a receiving officer, and a transfer destination.
Marcus followed the entries until he reached the shipment associated with his father's case.
The relevant line contained a handwritten notation that was missing from the digital version.
It read:
TRANSFER PENDING β AUTHORIZATION REQUIRED.
Beneath it was a date.
The date preceded the inspection that had supposedly led to the discovery of the missing property in his father's office.
Marcus pointed to the notation.
MARCUS: "This entry doesn't appear in the digital record."
EVELYN: "No. The digital version begins with the transfer marked as complete."
PETER: "The handwritten notation is part of the original sheet. It hasn't been added recently."
Marcus read the line again.
The notation did not prove that the property had never been transferred. It meant only that, at the time the original entry was written, the transfer had not yet been authorized.
A later document might explain what happened.
But if the digital record had removed the pending status, the change could have affected how investigators understood the chain of custody.
MARCUS: "Let's check the next page."
They continued through the folder.
A transfer receipt listed the name Daniel Mercer.
A second signature appeared beneath his.
The name was difficult to read, but the employee number was clearer.
Evelyn compared it with the personnel records she had obtained earlier.
EVELYN: "That number belongs to a supervisor named Harold Vance."
Marcus looked at her.
MARCUS: "Was Vance involved in the original investigation?"
EVELYN: "According to the file, he reviewed the property inventory."
MARCUS: "Did he sign the final report?"
EVELYN: "No. He signed the transfer authorization."
Peter photographed the document and recorded its location within the folder.
Marcus continued examining the remaining pages.
Several contained ordinary administrative notes.
One referred to a missing signature.
Another indicated that a property number had been corrected.
Then, near the back of the folder, he found a small sheet folded inside a paper sleeve.
It was not listed in the digital inventory.
The paper had been folded twice, and the edges were worn.
Peter photographed it before opening it.
Inside was a brief handwritten note.
The note stated that a transfer had been delayed because the receiving unit had not confirmed the quantity of items delivered.
It included a date, an initial, and a reference to a separate ledger.
There was no explicit accusation.
No confession.