Skip to main content
Back to all twelve witnesses

Sworn witness · No. 03 of 12

Det. Salamandez

Lead investigator, Swamp PD

Sworn to corroborate Exhibit A — the two tongue-prints

Sworn Affidavit

Sworn statement of Detective R. Salamandez, lead investigator, Swamp PD, testifying against the case his own department built. The witness requested this be noted for the record. It is so noted.

I caught this case. I want that on the record before anything else, because what I'm about to say is going to cost me a commendation and I'd like it understood I said it anyway. I built the file on PeePoo. And then I did the one thing the prosecution forgot to do: I looked at the two tongue-prints side by side under a lamp.

Exhibit A is two casts. One taken from PeePoo in the interview pond, freely given, no lawyer, no complaint — he offered his tongue before I asked, which is not a thing guilty frogs do. The other lifted off the seventeen checks. And they don't match. They're close. Identical-twin close. But at the tip, the forgery curls. PeePoo's lies dead flat, honest as still water. The check-tongue hooks at the end like it's reaching for something that isn't its. That curl is the whole case, and it points away from my defendant.

I ran the alibi too, because a good detective runs the alibi even when he doesn't want it to hold. It held. Three ponds over at 3:47, admiring a gnat, seen by a neighbor with a bad knee and confirmed by the gnat herself. You cannot be forging checks in one pond and complimenting an insect in another. I've been doing this for twenty years. The timeline is clean. It's the cleanest timeline I've ever tried and failed to break.

There is a second frog. Same face, same clutch, a pad across the water I'm advised not to name in open court. I have not been able to interview him. He is, I'm told, 'thriving,' and he does not answer his door for detectives. Make of that what you will. I have. PeePoo is guilty of exactly one thing: being a really chill amphibian who trusted the wrong brother with his own face.

Cross-Examination

Detective, you built the case. Isn't your reversal just an officer covering for a sympathetic defendant?
If I wanted to cover, I'd have buried the second tongue-cast instead of entering it as Exhibit A. Covering is what you do when the evidence is against you. Testifying is what you do when it isn't. This is the second one.
The curl at the tip — could that be distortion from the check paper rather than a different tongue?
Same distortion would appear on all seventeen at random angles. It appears at the same tip on all seventeen, identically. Paper doesn't curl a print the same way seventeen times. A tongue that curls does.
You've never interviewed the alleged twin. Isn't your alternate-suspect theory pure speculation?
I'd love to make it less speculative. Send me across the pond with a warrant and a cast kit. The department won't. Ask them why. That silence is evidence too — it's just not the kind I'm allowed to pin.
No further questions.
Then I'll say the last thing for free: I've charged a lot of frogs. Only one ever thanked me for it. Read that however you need to.

Testimony sworn, logged, and cross-examined. Exhibit A tongue-casts held under lamp-verified seal. Do not remove pins.

Back to all twelve witnesses

Enter it into the record

The lead detective wants it on the record. Help him.

Every repost is another character witness. Every follow keeps the case in the record.