She declined consent to a search and asked whether she could call her supervisor.
Mercer became angry.
He accused her of being argumentative and ordered her out of the car.
The encounter lasted nearly forty minutes.
No contraband was found.
No arrest was made.
And Evelyn eventually drove home without receiving a citation.
But she filed a complaint the following day.
She described feeling threatened, humiliated, and frightened that she might lose her job if the incident was reported inaccurately.
The complaint was entered as a traffic stop inquiry.
It never received a formal misconduct investigation.
When the audit team contacted Evelyn, she sounded surprised.
"I thought the county already decided nothing happened."
The investigator explained that the complaint was being reviewed to determine whether it had been handled appropriately.
Evelyn was quiet.
Then she asked, "Why now?"
The investigator didn't discuss my case.
She simply explained that the department was examining its complaint procedures.
Evelyn agreed to be interviewed.
During the interview, she provided details about the stop, including the approximate time, location, and the fact that she'd called her employer shortly afterward.
Her supervisor still remembered the conversation.
She had also saved a message Evelyn sent that night describing what happened while the memory was fresh.
The independent investigators compared those records with the available departmental materials.
Several aspects of Mercer's original account were disputed.
The case required further review.
But the complaint's classification was already difficult to justify.
Evelyn had not merely asked for information.
She had alleged misconduct.
And the system had treated her allegation as though it were an ordinary customer-service question.
The second case involved a college student named Adrian Lewis.
He was twenty-one at the time of his encounter with Mercer, a Black student studying engineering while working part-time at a grocery store. He'd been driving to his apartment after an evening shift when Mercer stopped him and questioned whether the vehicle belonged to him.
Adrian produced the registration.
The officer continued asking questions.
Eventually, Mercer requested permission to search.
Adrian declined.
He later reported that Mercer threatened to impound the vehicle unless Adrian cooperated.
The stop ended without a search, citation, or arrest.
But Adrian described the encounter to a campus legal adviser, who helped him submit a written complaint.
The complaint included the exact date, approximate time, and a request that any video be preserved.
In the tracking system, it was classified as citizen dissatisfaction with officer communication.
The case was closed after a supervisor reported speaking informally with Mercer.
There was no clear record showing that Adrian had been interviewed by an investigator.