Chapter 20 - Daniel explains the database
Daniel admitted the queries.
He denied criminal intent.
He said:
“My stepdaughter has a sensitive federal position. I had concerns about security issues touching my county.”
“Did you have a criminal complaint?”
“No.”
“Did you have a case?”
“Not initially.”
“Did you have a court order?”
“No.”
“Did you have a request from another agency?”
“No.”
“Did you tell your chief deputy?”
“Eventually.”
After seventeen searches.
Then the unrelated case numbers.
“Why use a stolen-trailer case number for a query about Carla Mitchell?”
Daniel:
“I needed the system to accept a reference.”
That answer hurt more than anything else.
He admitted using a case number simply to satisfy a system requirement.
Then:
“Did you know that was improper?”
“I knew it was technically outside policy.”
“Technically?”
Defense objected.
Sustained.
Then the audit.
Daniel admitted he was worried the searches would look improper.
Why create impersonation file?
“Because the pattern of behavior gave me reasonable suspicion.”
Before or after the audit request?
The file was opened after.
Then draft report written before kitchen.
Daniel called it:
“Planning notes.”
Could be.
Then firearm.
Why draw?
“Carla is military.”
“Was she armed?”
“I did not know.”
“Did you ask?”
“No.”
“Did she reach toward waistband?”
“No.”
“Threaten you?”
“No.”
Then chair kick.
“I did not intend for her head to hit floor.”
That may have been true.
Why kick chair?
“She was pulling against it.”
Video showed me sitting upright, one hand on table.
Not pulling violently.
Daniel said angle misleading.
Jury watched again.
No cinematic slow motion.
Just reality.
Then attempted tampering.
Daniel explained “clean up my query logs” meant:
“Organize and attach documentation.”
Chief Deputy Brooks said no documentation existed yet.
May you like
The tampering count remained uncertain.
That uncertainty would matter at verdict.
