EFR – Evidence filed Report

Case Reference: GC–FIR–004
Related Cases: GC–FIR–003 (Rail Incident), GM–FIR–002 (Food Contamination)
Filed By: Inspector Tomas Reed
Department: City Watch – Gearcross Detail
Date Filed: Current Fiscal Quarter
Status: Complete (Pending Archival Review)

I. PURPOSE OF REPORT

This report itemizes all physical, testimonial, environmental, and documentary evidence formally filed in relation to the multi-year disappearance of five minors originating in or adjacent to White Row Apartments Community Park.

This report does not include speculative material, rejected requests, or denied examinations except where relevant to evidentiary gaps.

II. CASE SCOPE SUMMARY

• Total victims identified: 5 (minors, ages 6–8)

• Time span: 8 years

• Primary location: White Row Community Park

• Secondary zones: Adjacent crossings, residential blocks

• Status: No recovered bodies, no confirmed suspects, no identified final holding site

Evidence herein supports pattern consistency but not prosecutable attribution.

III. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE (FILED)

E–01: Worn Leather Shoe (Child-Sized)

• Recovered near eastern park hedge (Year –6)

• Size consistent with Victim #2

• No blood, no tearing

• Laces tied

Disposition: Logged as lost personal item

E–02: Broken Wooden Toy (Painted Train Engine)

• Found beneath park bench (Year –4)

• Minor splintering inconsistent with long-term exposure

• Paint composition matches local vendors

Disposition: Returned to family prior to case linkage

E–03: Park Fence Paint Scraping

• Blue-green enamel trace

• Scraping height consistent with child’s shoulder

• Paint batch matches municipal maintenance stock

Disposition: Filed as environmental transfer

E–04: Bent Park Gate Hinge

• Deformation consistent with repeated forced opening or weight bearing

• Repaired twice within four-year window

• Maintenance logs incomplete

Disposition: Infrastructure wear

E–05: Unclaimed Knit Cap

• Found in storm drain near park (Year –1)

• Laundered recently at time of discovery

• No identifying marks

Disposition: Evidence storage, low priority

IV. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE (FILED)

D–01: Bell Schedule Correlation Chart

• Shows all disappearances occurred within ±4 minutes of bell transitions

• Verified against Grand Timing Exchange records

Disposition: Accepted, non-actionable

D–02: Guardian Work Rosters

• Confirms absence patterns during incidents

• Employers verified schedules

Disposition: Background context only

D–03: Park Maintenance Records

• Temporary structures removed without detailed documentation

• Includes benches, fencing, storage sheds

Disposition: Administrative record

D–04: Delayed Missing Person Reports

• All filed between 6 hours and 3 days after disappearance

• No anomalies noted at intake

Disposition: Standard processing

D–05: Community Petition Letters

• Three submissions requesting increased patrols

• All acknowledged, none acted upon

Disposition: Closed correspondence

V. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE (FILED)

T–01: Parent Statements (5)

• Consistent timeline confusion

• No sightings beyond initial absence

• High emotional variance, low informational value

Disposition: Filed

T–02: Community Caretaker Statement

• Confirms children regularly present during bell windows

• Advises she “kept them inside when she could”

Disposition: Filed, no follow-up

T–03: Maintenance Worker Statement

• Recalls “temporary storage use” near park in earlier years

• Cannot recall details

Disposition: Filed, credibility unassessed

VI. REQUESTED BUT DENIED EVIDENCE

R–01: Ground-Penetrating Survey (Park Grounds)

• Denied: “No indication of burial”

R–02: Expanded Sewer Access Review

• Denied: “Outside reasonable scope”

R–03: Retrospective Utility Mapping

• Denied: “Records incomplete, low yield”

R–04: Cross-District Movement Logs

• Denied: “No evidence of transport”

VII. ANALYTICAL MATERIAL (PARTIALLY FILED)

A–01: Victim Profile Convergence Report

• Demonstrates demographic and situational overlap

• Accepted as analytical, not evidentiary

A–02: Backward Movement Reconstruction

• Traces disappearance window to park perimeter

• Final node unresolved

Disposition: Marked “inconclusive”

VIII. EVIDENTIARY GAPS (NOTED)

• No recovered remains

• No verified concealment location

• No transport confirmation

• No forensic samples sufficient for escalation

These gaps persist despite pattern certainty.

IX. OFFICIAL EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

“While the collected materials demonstrate correlation, they do not establish criminal mechanism or responsible party. No further evidentiary pursuit is warranted at this time.”

— Gearcross Review Officer, unsigned

X. INSPECTOR’S ADDENDUM (FILED BUT FLAGGED)

The absence of a final location is treated as a lack of evidence.

I believe it is evidence.

A place existed.
It was used.
Then it was removed.

Temporary structures leave fewer traces than permanent crimes.

The children were not taken into darkness.
They were taken into utility.

XI. FINAL STATUS

• Evidence Filed: Yes

• Evidence Actionable: No

• Case Escalation Approved: No

• Archival Recommendation: Yes

XII. CLOSING STATEMENT

This file is complete because the system requires completeness.

It is unresolved because resolution would require acknowledging that civic space can be weaponized quietly, repeatedly, and without resistance.

The evidence shows how.
It does not show where.

That absence has been deemed acceptable.

Filed by:
Inspector Tomas Reed
City Watch, Gearcross