Reddick claimed he had urged Voss to remain calm and follow his attorney's guidance.
He denied directing or encouraging any confrontation with me.
He also acknowledged knowing my mother from the old cleaning contract.
But he said he had not connected Gloria Ellison with Judge Naomi Ellison until the courthouse incident became public.
Investigators examined those statements.
They reviewed telephone records.
They interviewed administrative staff.
They obtained relevant calendar entries.
The evidence confirmed that the meeting occurred.
It did not establish that Reddick instructed Voss to harm me.
Then investigators found a second meeting.
One that had not appeared in the anonymous packet.
The second meeting took place the night before my assault.
It was held at a private restaurant outside Columbus.
Voss attended.
Pruitt attended.
Reddick was not present.
But another person was.
A former police union representative named Thomas Baines.
Baines had worked with Voss for years.
He had also been involved in discussions concerning the Turner lawsuit.
The restaurant's records showed the group remained there for nearly two hours.
Investigators interviewed Baines.
He initially described the gathering as an ordinary dinner.
Then he acknowledged that the officers had discussed the upcoming hearing.
He said Voss was angry about the case.
Voss believed the lawsuit had damaged his reputation.
He blamed Turner.
He blamed the attorneys.
And he blamed the judge assigned to the proceeding.
Baines recalled Voss saying something about teaching people to respect the badge.
But Baines denied hearing any specific plan to confront me.
Investigators pressed him for details.
He admitted that Voss had shown him my judicial biography.
Then he said something that changed the investigation.
“Derek thought she was going to embarrass him.”
The investigator asked, “Why?”
Baines looked down.
“He said she was looking for a reason to make an example out of him.”
“Did he have evidence of that?”
“No.”
“Had Judge Ellison made any improper statements about him?”
“Not that I know of.”
“Then why did he believe it?”
Baines hesitated.
“Because he was angry.”
The investigator waited.
Baines continued.
“He thought everybody was against him.”
“Did he mention confronting Judge Ellison?”
Baines looked toward his attorney.
Then he answered.
“He said he wanted to see whether she was as confident outside the courtroom as she was on the bench.”
The statement was troubling.
It suggested that Voss may have recognized me and deliberately approached me.
But investigators needed corroboration.
They examined the officers' messages.
They reviewed their movements.
They compared their accounts with the courthouse footage.
And they discovered that Voss had arrived at the courthouse nearly an hour before he was required to appear.
Pruitt arrived shortly afterward.
Both men remained near the public entrance.
They did not proceed directly to their attorneys' meeting area.
They watched people entering the building.
At 8:17, Voss received a message from Pruitt.
She's here.
At 8:18, Voss approached me.
When Rebecca told me about the message, I felt cold.
“She knew?” I asked.
“Who?”
“Pruitt. He recognized me.”
“The evidence suggests he did.”
“And Voss?”
“The message was sent to him immediately before the encounter.”
I closed my eyes.
For months, I had believed the officers might have mistaken me for someone else.
That possibility had never excused their conduct.
But it had shaped how I understood the morning.
Now the evidence suggested something worse.
They may have known exactly who I was.
I looked toward the window.
“Rebecca, why didn't this come out at trial?”
“The message wasn't recovered in that form during the original examination. Investigators obtained additional data through a later forensic review.”
I nodded.
“Does that change the convictions?”
“Not automatically.”
“What happens now?”
“The prosecutors will evaluate whether the new evidence supports any further lawful action. They also have obligations concerning disclosure and post-conviction proceedings.”
I was quiet.
Then I asked, “Does it explain the anonymous envelope?”
“Not yet.”
The person who sent the envelope was identified two months later.
Her name was Andrea Baines.
She was Thomas Baines's daughter.
Thirty-two years old.
A former county records employee.
She had obtained copies of documents while assisting her father with old administrative files.
She had sent them anonymously because she feared retaliation.
When investigators interviewed her, she admitted that she believed Sheriff Reddick had influenced Voss.
But she had no direct evidence that Reddick ordered the assault.
She had included my mother's complaint because she thought it established a possible motive.
Investigators explained the importance of distinguishing verified facts from speculation.
Andrea acknowledged that she had selected documents supporting her theory while omitting others.
She said she had been frightened.
She also said she believed the original investigation had missed evidence.
The investigators documented her statements.
They examined the source of the records.
And they continued following the evidence.