Several invoices referred to training sessions that no employee at Westbridge Towing Services remembered attending. Others described consulting reports that could not be located. The company's bookkeeper recalled that some invoices arrived already approved by Raymond Kessler, the owner, with little explanation of what they covered. Kessler initially described the payments as ordinary business expenses, then asked to speak with his attorney when investigators requested supporting documents.
The inquiry widened carefully. Investigators obtained records of how tow assignments were made, interviewed drivers who had worked the night shifts, and compared the police dispatch information with the towing company's billing history. Some operators remembered waiting near Highland Avenue on nights when Reigns and Voss were both working. Others recalled being told that certain officers preferred Westbridge Towing Services even when another approved company was available.
One driver, a forty-seven-year-old man named Paul Mercer, described how uncomfortable he had felt when towing cars belonging to motorists who insisted nothing was mechanically wrong. He had assumed the police had authority he did not understand. "I drove the truck," he told investigators. "I didn't decide who got stopped. But I remember one woman asking whether she could at least take her child's car seat before we hooked up her car, and I still hear her voice."
The woman was identified in the files as Tamika Lewis, a hospital receptionist whose compact car had been towed after a disputed stop the previous winter. She had been carrying her daughter's school bag and a grocery receipt when Reigns claimed a damaged light made the vehicle unsafe. Lewis said the officer offered a cash resolution that she could not afford. She spent the following week borrowing rides from coworkers while arguing with the towing company over charges.
Kim arranged for Lewis to give a statement through the independent team. She did not tell Lewis that other motorists had complained about similar demands. The woman's account was detailed and painful, but Kim resisted the temptation to promise a fast resolution. She knew that credibility came from handling each witness as a person rather than as one more item supporting a preferred conclusion.
When the forensic findings were completed, Kim carried the report to Morrison herself. He read the first page, then the second, his jaw tightening in a way that suggested anger at being deceived rather than anger at having to reverse course. He asked Bell to explain how the original records had been authenticated and whether there were alternative explanations for the discrepancy. Bell answered each question without dramatizing the evidence.
"So the accusation against Ellison is unsupported," Morrison said finally. "The records he was shown were altered after the investigation began." Kim nodded. "The preserved originals show that his access was authorized. The changes are associated with Sergeant Voss's account and require a separate misconduct and potential criminal inquiry. We recommend immediate restoration of Captain Ellison's administrative status while that inquiry proceeds."
Morrison sat back. He had placed the incoming captain on leave because official-looking records suggested evidence manipulation. He had also agreed to a forensic review instead of accepting the first report as final. That second decision had kept the department from burying the truth beneath an apparently legitimate administrative action. "Bring Ellison in," he said. "And make sure no one connected to the original complaint gets near these files."