Helen placed the recovered footage on the screen.
The referee moved toward the fighters.
"Did you instruct the editing team to shorten this sequence?" Helen asked.
"I asked the production team to prepare a coherent broadcast."
"Did you know the sequence had been shortened in a way that obscured the referee's stoppage signal?"
"I don't recall reviewing that specific detail."
"Victor Sloane says he approved the final edit after you told him the original footage would create confusion."
Paul closed the briefcase.
"Victor is attempting to protect himself."
"Is that what you're doing?"
"I've spent thirty years working in sports administration. I've organized events that gave hundreds of athletes opportunities to compete. I won't accept the suggestion that I deliberately endangered a fighter because someone wants a villain."
"This committee isn't asking you to accept a label. We're asking you to explain the evidence."
Paul looked toward the door.
"I've answered your questions."
"Not all of them."
"I have nothing further to add."
Helen ended the interview.
Paul left the building without looking back.
When Helen reviewed the recording with the committee's legal advisers, they agreed that Paul's account contained significant gaps.
He denied remembering the timing instruction, but his explanation did not account for Martin's statement, the timing logs, or the communications directing the editing team to shorten the footage.
The committee arranged a second interview.
This time, Helen asked Paul to explain a specific email recovered from the event operations account.
The message had been sent shortly before Michael's bout.
The email had been sent by Paul.
"Who did you mean by 'coordinate directly with timing'?" Helen asked.
"The timekeeping staff."
"Did you authorize an extension of the round?"
"I authorized adjustments to the event schedule. I did not authorize anyone to ignore a referee's stoppage."
"Did you understand that a schedule adjustment could affect the timing of an active bout?"
"I expected the officials to manage the competition."
Helen looked at him.
"Mr. Danner, the evidence suggests that you knew the display had been manually reset and that you later approved a broadcast edit that omitted the disputed sequence. Can you explain why?"
"The sponsors had been complaining about the event. The early fights had run long, and the final schedule was slipping. I was under pressure to finish on time."
"Was that pressure the reason for the override?"
Paul hesitated.
"I told the timing staff to keep the event moving. I didn't expect the situation to become dangerous."
"Did you tell them to reset the display?"
"I told them to correct the schedule."
"Those are not the same thing."
"No."
Finally, he said, "I should have stopped the fight when the referee signaled."
It was also the first time Paul had acknowledged that his decisions might have affected the bout.
"I thought the referee would regain control. I thought the fighters would separate. I thought the situation could be managed without interrupting the event."
Helen asked, "And when Michael was injured?"
Paul looked down.
"Then I knew we had a serious problem."
"What did you do?"
"I called the legal team. I told Victor to prepare the official report. I asked the production staff to review the footage."
"Did you instruct them to remove the stoppage sequence?"
Paul closed his eyes.
"I told them to shorten the sequence so the broadcast would not be confusing."
"Did you understand that doing so would make the official account incomplete?"
"Yes."
"I told myself we needed time to establish what had happened. I told myself the legal team would correct anything that proved inaccurate. But the report became the official version, and once it did, everyone started treating it as the truth."
Helen looked at him.
"Why didn't you correct it?"
"Because I knew I would lose everything."
Then Helen closed her notebook.
The interview would not determine legal responsibility. That decision belonged to the appropriate authorities after a full examination of the evidence.
But the investigation had finally established something important.
The timing discrepancy had not been a random technical failure.
Paul had issued instructions to keep the event on schedule, had failed to ensure that the referee's stoppage was respected, and had later participated in the preparation of an incomplete official account.
Whether his actions met the threshold for criminal wrongdoing would require further review.
But the moral truth was already clear.
He had placed the demands of an event above the safety of a fighter.
Daniel received the summary from Helen the next morning.
"Is it enough?"
"Enough for what?"
"For you to know what happened."
Daniel looked at the document.
"It explains part of it."
"What part is still missing?"