The same old question:
Who has authority?
I wrote:
Automation does not remove discretion. It hides discretion upstream.
That line got me invited to conferences I did not want.
I went to some.
Declined others.
At one, a young engineer said:
“We can make immutable chain.”
“No.”
“Cryptographically.”
“You can make records harder to alter.”
“That’s immutable.”
“Sensor can be wrong.”
“Input can be false.”
“Person can tag wrong object honestly.”
“Or intentionally before record begins.”
He thought.
“So blockchain not enough?”
I smiled.
“No technology is enough.”
He looked disappointed.
Then energized.
Engineers like unsolved problems.
Good.
The Harland video remained online.
My face aged everywhere except video.
People recognized younger version.
Once at airport a man stared.
“You’re packet guy.”
“I hope not.”
“You are.”
He smiled.
“That was badass.”
“No.”
He laughed as if I were modest.
I was not.
It was frightening and stupid.
He asked for photo.
I declined.
No offense.
I did not want confrontation as identity.
He seemed disappointed.
Fine.
Another time a police officer recognized me.
He approached.
I braced.
He said:
“That case made my department change evidence policy.”
I relaxed.
“Good change?”
“Mostly.”
“Mostly?”
“More forms.”
“That might be good.”
He laughed.
“Sergeant hates you.”
“Which?”
“Mine.”
“That’s fine.”
He shook hand.
Those moments reminded me stories travel in ways you cannot control.
At seventy-five, I developed tremor.
Not severe.
But cameras harder.
Writing slower.
I retired fully.
The word retired felt fake for a year.
I still woke at six.
Opened email.
No cases.
My niece told me to get hobbies.
I bought a cheap piano.
Terrible.
Plants.
Killed two.
Walked.
Read fiction for first time in years.
In novels, evidence always means something.
Convenient.
I enjoyed.
My niece’s son—my great-nephew—studied journalism.
He wanted interview.
“No.”
“Why?”
“Family.”
“That’s discrimination.”
“Correct.”
He persisted for college project.
I agreed on one condition.
No Harland.
He interviewed about how experts should speak to reporters.
Smart.
He asked:
“What’s biggest mistake journalists make with forensic experts?”
“Ask what happened when expert can only say what test shows.”
“Example?”
“DNA can say profile matches with probability.”
“It cannot automatically say person committed crime.”
“Fingerprint can place contact.”
“Not explain why.”
“Seal anomaly can show chain problem.”
“Not automatically prove planting.”
He wrote.