Ruth asked whether Nolan had proposed additional testing before the present contract. He said that he had submitted reports over several years documenting similar observations and suggesting changes to the verification procedure. Ellis confirmed that the records were included in the board materials and that their submission histories had been verified against archived company systems. Nolan explained that he did not know why the proposals had been deferred. He had received acknowledgments, then no authorization to conduct the work.
Preston turned toward him sharply. "Exactly what qualifies you to challenge the judgment of senior management?"
Nolan held his gaze. "I'm not asking you to accept my opinion because of who I am. I'm asking you to read the measurements. If the data don't meet the standard, the person asked to sign must be allowed to request another test."
"You would risk hundreds of jobs over a few numbers on a screen?"
"Those numbers are part of what protects those jobs," Nolan replied.
The words were not dramatic, and that was why the room seemed to change after he spoke them. They drew the discussion away from personalities and back to a contract signed by people who had promised performance they now had to verify. Margaret asked for the exact specification, and Ellis supplied it. The attorneys confirmed that the acceptance language required compliance with the stated limits and did not permit an undocumented substitution of management judgment.
Ellis then presented the electronic evidence. He used a restrained tone, walking the directors through the history without skipping inconvenient possibilities. Nolan had returned the report for review and logged out at 9:14 p.m. on December 22. A later administrative session changed the report status to approved and associated his electronic credentials with the acceptance. Independently checked access and backup records did not support the conclusion that Nolan performed the action through his ordinary session.
Preston folded his arms. "Software can behave unpredictably. Anyone who works in this industry knows that."
"That's true," Ellis said. "Which is why we had the technical administrators test alternative explanations, including clock synchronization and ordinary workflow errors. Their documented review did not explain this event as a system malfunction. We have preserved the evidence for outside forensic examination, and we are not asserting that we know who physically operated the terminal."
Ruth looked toward the screen. "Whose privileges could authorize the change?"
"An administrative group under the authority of the chief operating officer's office," Ellis replied. "Several individuals had delegated access. That fact narrows the inquiry, but it does not establish who acted."
Preston relaxed slightly. "Then this is an internal control issue. I'm glad we're finally getting to something the technology team can investigate instead of conducting a character assassination. If someone misused the account, we'll identify that person and deal with them."
The answer had the shape of reasonableness. It acknowledged a possible problem while keeping responsibility far from the person most concerned about the report. Several directors exchanged glances. For a few minutes Nolan feared that the meeting would end with an agreement to investigate later while allowing the questionable certification to remain in force.
Then Graham Winslow cleared his throat. He had been sitting near the end of the table with his hands folded over a folder. He looked exhausted, and his tie was slightly crooked, as though he had tied it without looking in a mirror. Ruth asked whether Human Resources wished to add anything about the termination process.
"Yes," Graham said. His voice shook. "I need to correct the disciplinary record."
Preston turned toward him. "Graham, this is not the time for a procedural digression."