Bennett placed the documents across her desk and began arranging them by date.
She wanted to understand not only what people had reported, but also what the department had done after receiving those reports.
The first complaint involved a delivery driver who had been stopped outside a commercial building. The driver said Brooks had ordered him to leave his vehicle and threatened to have it towed after he asked why he was being questioned.
The complaint was closed after Brooks stated that the driver had been uncooperative.
The second involved a university student who claimed that Brooks had threatened to arrest him after he asked whether he was free to leave during a street encounter.
The third concerned a woman who alleged that Brooks had grabbed her arm during a roadside conversation.
The fourth involved a security guard who reported being shoved during a disagreement outside a public building.
The fifth concerned a pedestrian who claimed Brooks had threatened him for recording a police encounter.
The remaining complaints described aggressive language, unnecessary threats, questionable physical contact, and repeated arguments after members of the public questioned police instructions.
Bennett noticed that several complaints had been closed within a few days of being submitted.
In one case, a witness had been identified by name, but there was no record that the witness had ever been contacted.
In another, the complainant had mentioned a nearby business with security cameras. The department had not requested the footage.
A third file contained an allegation of physical contact but had been classified as a communication dispute.
Detective Bennett: "These files are missing too much information."
The records administrator sitting across from her looked through the documents.
Records Administrator: "Some of the original attachments may have been lost when the department changed its record system."
Detective Bennett: "Then we need to establish which records were transferred, which were lost, and whether anyone made an effort to recover them."
Records Administrator: "I'll contact the archive team."
Detective Bennett: "And I want the original closure decisions. We need to know who reviewed each complaint and what evidence they considered."
The administrator nodded and left the office.
Bennett opened the department's supervisory database.
Several of the earlier complaints had been reviewed by Lieutenant Frank Reynolds, who had supervised Brooks for almost three years.
Reynolds had received positive performance evaluations and was considered an experienced supervisor. He was known for organizing patrol schedules efficiently and maintaining good relationships with the officers under his command.
But the records raised a serious question about whether he had been sufficiently critical when reviewing complaints involving Brooks.
Bennett requested a formal interview.
That afternoon, Lieutenant Reynolds entered the conference room carrying a folder.
Lieutenant Reynolds: "I understand you want to discuss the complaints involving Officer Brooks."
Detective Bennett: "Yes. I've reviewed the initial database records and the archived files. Several complaints describe similar behavior, and I want to understand how they were handled."
Reynolds placed his folder on the table.
Lieutenant Reynolds: "Those complaints were reviewed at the time. Some were closed because there wasn't enough evidence to establish misconduct."
Detective Bennett: "I'm aware of the closure decisions. I'm asking whether the investigations were complete."
Lieutenant Reynolds: "We followed the procedures available to us."
Detective Bennett: "In one complaint, the person identified a witness, but there is no record that anyone contacted that witness."
Reynolds opened his folder.
Lieutenant Reynolds: "I don't remember that particular case."
Detective Bennett: "Another complaint referred to security footage from a nearby business. There is no record that the department requested it."
Lieutenant Reynolds: "It may have been unavailable."
Detective Bennett: "There is no note showing that anyone checked."
Reynolds paused.
Lieutenant Reynolds: "We had a large workload. We couldn't pursue every possible lead indefinitely."
Detective Bennett: "No one is asking you to pursue every possible lead indefinitely. But when a complaint identifies available evidence, the department needs to make a reasonable effort to obtain it."
Lieutenant Reynolds: "I understand."
Detective Bennett: "Did you ever compare the complaints involving Brooks to determine whether they described a recurring problem?"
Reynolds looked at the documents.
Lieutenant Reynolds: "I reviewed them individually."
Detective Bennett: "Why were they not reviewed together?"
Lieutenant Reynolds: "At the time, they appeared to involve separate incidents."
Detective Bennett: "They were separate incidents, but several contained similar allegations. Did you ever consider whether there was a pattern of aggressive communication or unnecessary physical contact?"
Reynolds did not answer immediately.