"No."
Chen leaned back.
"Then we have a problem."
The investigators continued.
Another complaint involved a man named Samuel Ortiz, who said Miller had threatened to arrest him after he questioned an instruction to move away from a public sidewalk.
The report stated that Ortiz had become verbally confrontational.
But a witness statement described him as calm and cooperative.
A fifth complaint involved a woman who had asked Miller why he was questioning her teenage son outside a shopping center.
The officer's report described the woman as aggressive.
Her written statement said she had simply asked for his badge number.
The similarities were difficult to ignore.
Detective Chen began preparing a comparison chart.
Each complaint had its own circumstances, but the same phrases appeared repeatedly in the officer's reports.
"Refused to cooperate."
"Displayed suspicious behavior."
"Questioned lawful instructions."
"Created unnecessary tension."
Those phrases were not automatically evidence of misconduct.
But when they appeared in reports involving people who described similar experiences, investigators needed to determine whether they accurately reflected what happened.
Chen placed the comparison chart on Brooks's desk.
"I think we need to examine the original supervisory decisions."
Brooks read the page.
"Agreed."
"Some complaints were closed without reviewing available evidence."
"Then we need to find out who made those decisions."
Foster added another concern.
"Several of the complaints were reviewed by the same patrol supervisor."
Brooks looked up.
"Who?"
"Sergeant William Carter."
"Was he Miller's direct supervisor?"
"Yes, during most of that period."
Brooks closed the folder.
"Then we need to interview him."
At 11:40 a.m., Sergeant Carter was asked to attend an administrative interview.
He entered the room looking surprised.
He had been with the department for almost twenty years and had supervised Miller for much of the officer's career.
Captain Brooks explained the purpose of the meeting.
"We are reviewing several previous complaints involving Officer Miller. Your name appears in the supervisory records."
Carter nodded.
"I remember some of them."
"Can you explain how they were reviewed?"
"We followed the department's standard process."
"Did you personally examine all available evidence?"
Carter looked at the folder.
"I reviewed the reports."
"That wasn't my question."
He shifted in his chair.
"Not every complaint had video."
"Some did."
"I don't recall seeing all of it."
Detective Chen opened one of the files.
"Did you receive this email from the security company regarding the Rebecca Mills complaint?"
Carter examined the page.
"I don't remember that."
"It was sent to your department address three days after the complaint was closed."
Carter looked uncomfortable.
"I would have to check my records."
Brooks remained calm.
"Did you ever reopen the investigation?"
"No."
"Why not?"
"I believed the initial review was sufficient."
Chen placed another document on the table.
"What about the complaint from Anthony Price?"
Carter read the summary.
"That was a routine interaction."
"Did you interview the witness?"
"Which witness?"
"The employee who was standing at the pharmacy entrance."
Carter looked at the document again.
"I don't remember."
Chen turned to another page.
"The witness statement is attached to the original complaint."
Carter said nothing.
Brooks waited.
After several seconds, Carter finally spoke.
"I handled a lot of complaints during that period. I don't remember every detail."
"That's understandable," Brooks said. "But we are not asking you to remember everything. We are asking you to explain the decisions recorded under your name."
Carter nodded slowly.
The interview continued for another hour.
He admitted that several complaints had been closed after reviewing the officer's written statement without obtaining all available independent evidence.
He insisted that he had not intentionally protected Miller.
He said the department had been understaffed and that supervisors often had to prioritize more serious cases.
But Brooks was not satisfied with that explanation.
A lack of time might explain why an investigation had been delayed.
It did not explain why evidence received after a complaint was closed had never been reviewed.
After the interview, Chen returned to her office.
She had another task.
She needed to contact the people who had filed the earlier complaints.
Some had moved.
Some had changed telephone numbers.
Others had never responded to the department's previous attempts to contact them.
But two addresses were still valid.
One belonged to Anthony Price.
The other belonged to Rebecca Mills.
Chen called Price first.
"Mr. Price, my name is Detective Laura Chen. I'm calling from the police department's professional standards division. You filed a complaint involving Officer Daniel Miller approximately two years ago."
There was a pause.
"I remember."
"We are reviewing the original complaint and would like to ask whether you are willing to speak with us again."
Price gave a short laugh.
"Why now?"
Chen did not avoid the question.
"We have received new information involving the same officer, and we are reviewing earlier incidents to determine whether there is a broader pattern."
Price was silent for several seconds.
"Someone finally listened?"
"We are trying to examine the evidence properly."
Price sighed.