But in the tracking system, the complaints had been entered under categories such as service inquiry, public contact clarification, or general correspondence.
Those categories didn't necessarily require a misconduct investigation.
Some were appropriate for ordinary questions.
But the descriptions Teresa showed me contained allegations that appeared to require at least a proper intake assessment.
I looked up.
"Who authorized these classifications?"
She hesitated.
Then answered quietly.
"Usually a supervisor."
"Which supervisor?"
Her eyes moved toward the door.
Then she whispered.
"Lieutenant Halden's office handled most of them."
For a moment, I felt the familiar tightening in my chest.
I looked down at the incident numbers again.
Several involved Officer Daniel Mercer.
And at least two appeared to describe traffic stops along the same road where he had smashed my window.
I didn't immediately launch an investigation of Halden based on Teresa's concerns.
The records needed review, the context mattered, and I had to avoid involving myself in decisions that could overlap improperly with my personal case.
Instead, I brought the material through the appropriate supervisory and legal channels and recommended an independent audit of complaint classification practices.
Sheriff Whitaker approved the audit.
A county records specialist who had not participated in the original classifications was assigned to examine the relevant period. The review focused on whether complaints had been coded according to their content, whether evidence was preserved, and whether any supervisory instructions discouraged proper intake.
The auditors were instructed to examine records across the department rather than focus solely on Mercer.
That was important.
If the process was flawed, the problem could affect complaints against many officers.
And if the audit concentrated only on the man who'd hurt me, it could appear to be an extension of my personal grievance.
I wanted the records to answer the questions.
Not my anger.
Three weeks later, the audit's preliminary findings showed that a substantial number of complaints had been improperly classified.
Some involved simple mistakes.
Others reflected confusing instructions.
But a smaller group raised serious concerns.
Several complainants had explicitly alleged misconduct, yet their reports were categorized in ways that prevented automatic referral for review.
And the notes attached to some entries showed that supervisors had discouraged escalation without documenting a sufficient basis.
The problem wasn't limited to Officer Mercer.
But his name appeared often enough to justify a separate examination of his complaint history through investigators independent of my case.
When Sheriff Whitaker received the preliminary findings, she called me into her office.
She stood beside the window, looking toward the parking lot.