Each entry was supported by a document, recording, or witness statement.
Sarah sent the chronology to the prosecutor's office as part of the continuing submission.
The prosecutor then asked for additional information about the original recording.
A digital-forensics specialist examined the file and confirmed that the submitted copy was consistent with the cloud-stored original. The specialist also reviewed metadata associated with the upload and found no indication that the video had been edited before it was preserved.
That did not prove every detail of Walter's account.
It did establish that the recording had not been altered to create the appearance of the encounter.
The specialist also clarified the limits of the footage.
The camera showed Cole removing the wallet and handling the cash. It captured Walter asking about the money and Cole denying that he had taken any. It also showed Pike standing nearby.
It could not reveal what either officer had thought.
It could not, by itself, establish whether another person had directed them to act.
Those questions required other evidence.
Walter appreciated the distinction.
He did not want the investigation to become a story in which every unanswered question was filled with the most dramatic explanation.
He wanted the truth, even if the truth turned out to be smaller and less satisfying than the rumors spreading online.
Then, on a cold Thursday morning, the prosecutor's office asked Walter to attend a meeting.
Sarah drove him there.
Daniel followed separately.
They were taken to a conference room where Assistant District Attorney Helen Price sat with two investigators and a digital-forensics specialist.
Price began by explaining that the meeting was not a trial and that no final charging decision had been announced.
She wanted Walter to review several pieces of evidence and confirm certain details.
The first was the traffic-stop video.
Walter watched the familiar sequence again.
The lights.
Cole's approach.
The wallet.
The cash.
The denial.
The words about confusion.
He felt the same anger he had felt the first time, but it no longer controlled him.
He had learned to let the recording speak without adding anything to it.
The second item was an audio clip from the patrol-car system.
The specialist played it.
“He's got cash.”
Then the second voice.
“Then make it quick.”
The clip was followed by a longer segment containing radio traffic and background noise.
Price explained that investigators had compared the audio with recordings from other shifts and had requested expert analysis of the voices.
They had not reached a conclusive identification.
However, the timeline showed that Cole and Pike had been in contact with Sergeant Vance shortly before the stop.
That contact could have been routine.
The investigators were still examining it.
The third item was a record from the department's property database.
It showed a revision to Cole's incident report made after the traffic stop.
The report originally contained a note that Walter had possessed a large amount of cash.
The note was later removed.
The final version stated that no money had been seized.
Cole had not yet provided a satisfactory explanation for the change.
His attorney maintained that the revision was part of ordinary report preparation and did not establish wrongdoing.
Price stressed that the revision was not proof by itself.
But in combination with the video, it was relevant.
Walter stared at the screen.
“So he wrote that I had cash, then removed it?”
“The record indicates that a note about cash was present in an earlier version and later removed,” Price said. “We are still examining the circumstances.”
Walter nodded.
He appreciated the careful wording, but the implications were difficult to ignore.
“What happens now?”
“We will complete the remaining interviews and review the evidence. We have not made a final decision about charges.”
Walter looked at her.
“Can I ask you something without it becoming part of the investigation?”
“You can ask. I can't promise that the answer will be confidential.”
He gave a small, tired smile.
“Fair enough.”
He folded his hands.
“If you find that an officer stole from me, will the department simply give me my money back and call it finished?”
Price did not answer immediately.
“No. The return of property and the question of criminal responsibility are separate issues. If the evidence supports charges, we will consider them under the law. The department will also have to address its own policies and any disciplinary matters within its authority.”
Walter looked down.
“That's what I wanted to know.”
The meeting lasted another hour.
When it ended, Price thanked him for his cooperation.