She looked toward the window.
"But I know he had enough information to check."
For several seconds, neither spoke.
Then Brooks said quietly.
"The report is finding more than one problem."
Naomi turned.
"What do you mean?"
He hesitated.
"Other incidents."
The broader patrol review had identified several complaints with patterns resembling Naomi's encounter.
The first involved a fifty-eight-year-old woman named Teresa Alvarez.
Teresa worked as a home-health aide and frequently visited elderly clients during unusual hours.
Several months earlier, Grant had stopped her outside a residence after a neighbor reported an unfamiliar vehicle near the property.
Teresa explained that she was there to provide overnight care.
She offered her employment identification and the client's contact information.
Grant questioned her repeatedly.
The encounter lasted far longer than necessary.
Ultimately, the homeowner confirmed Teresa was authorized to be there.
No charges were filed.
But Teresa submitted a complaint describing the officer's aggressive tone and refusal to examine the information she'd offered early in the encounter.
The complaint was reviewed narrowly.
A supervisor concluded that the stop itself had a legitimate basis and that no major injury occurred.
The analysis paid little attention to the unnecessary duration or the officer's repeated dismissal of verification opportunities.
Another complaint involved a young Black father named Darius Coleman.
Darius had been waiting outside his sister's apartment building with his four-year-old son when officers responded to a report of suspicious activity.
Grant demanded identification.
Darius complied.
But when he asked why he was being detained, Grant accused him of becoming argumentative.
The encounter escalated verbally before another officer checked the address and confirmed that Darius was waiting for a family member.
He was released without charges.
Darius later complained that his son began crying when Grant threatened to handcuff him.
That complaint also produced little corrective action.
The third case involved a middle-aged white homeowner whose house alarm activated while he was replacing a door lock.
The officer's initial suspicion was understandable.
But Grant continued questioning him aggressively after the man produced multiple forms of verification.
The homeowner complained.
The matter was closed with informal counseling.
Individually, the cases contained different circumstances.
Together, they raised a question the department hadn't adequately addressed.
Was Grant repeatedly escalating encounters because he interpreted ordinary requests for explanation as challenges to his authority?
Naomi reviewed the summaries with increasing concern.
She didn't want the investigators to assume every complaint was true simply because her own encounter went badly.
Each case required independent evaluation.
But the consistency of the allegations troubled her.
Residents from different backgrounds described similar experiences.
They tried to establish who they were.
Grant treated their explanations as excuses.