In October of 2014, two 18-year-old friends, Brian Bridges and Paul Miller, went on a short hike in the Red Rocks of Nevada.

They were supposed to return by nightfall, but their trail broke off near an old quarry where they found only a severed backpack strap and a drag mark.

One year had passed, and when a park service patrolman spotted an emaciated boy on a service road, he didn’t know that he was Brian Bridges, and that his return would be the beginning of a story much darker than the disappearance itself.

Leave their car in the parking lot at the entrance to Red Rock Canyon Recreation Area.

A surveillance camera captures them leaving in the early morning hours.

Both have small backpacks, light hiking clothes, and minimal water supplies.

According to their families, the goal is to hike the Calico Tank Trail for a day without spending the night.

The route is considered to be uncrowded, but open to visitors.

The first alarm signal comes after 9:00 in the evening.

The boy’s families cannot contact them at that time.

According to the mobile operator, Brian and Paul’s phones were last registered at the cell tower near the parking lot in the morning.

Once they started walking, the signal disappeared completely, which is considered typical for the area.

The families contact the sheriff’s department and the officer on duty passes the information on to the park service.

Late at night, the first rangers inspect the boy’s car.

The car is locked.

There are no signs of break-in or forced entry.

Inside are things that are not usually taken on long hikes.

Some clothes, chargers, food packages, and a few small personal items.

Nothing that would indicate preparation for an overnight stay in the mountains.

This becomes the official basis for initiating a search operation.

By dawn, the first group of dog handlers is formed.

According to one of the experts, the dog takes a clear trail from the parking lot and moves along the main calico tank trail.

The route passes between large massifs of red rock, then turns in the direction of the old quarry.

Two other dog handlers confirm the same direction of travel.

A few hundred yards off the main trail, the dog leads the group to a rock break that leads to a maintenance passage.

There, the first two pieces of evidence are found.

The first is a severed backpack strap that the family later identifies as belonging to Brian.

According to the preliminary examination, the brake has a clear line indicating the use of a sharp object.

The second is a several foot long drag mark that runs along a rock wall and breaks off at a narrow vertical crack in the rock.

The park service report states that the crack is several inches wide and does not allow an adult to pass inside.

A parks engineer who arrives to inspect the rock notes the risk of rock slide if the crack is attempted to widen.

This makes it impossible to carry out any search activities inside the technical fault.

The rescuers examine the nearby beams and niche depressions, but do not find any additional traces.

By noon, volunteers join in.

They examine the sides of the KCO tank, dry stream beds, and technical trails once used by quarry workers.

According to one of the rangers, the area has a high instability index, loose soil, sudden changes in level, and stone ledges that move under minimal load.

At the same time, drone operators are surveying several square miles of the area.

According to them, the rocks retain heat even after sunset, which gives false signals on thermal imagers.

No silhouette or heat spot that could correspond to a person is found.

There are no traces of campfires or any temporary campsites on the drone images.

In the afternoon, the rangers inspect areas where tourists sometimes get the wrong direction.

Side gorges, short climbs to viewpoints, small terraces.

The result is the same.

Zero evidence.

The evening report reads, “There are no signs of movement after the point where the trail disappeared.

Visitors who were on the trails that morning are interviewed separately.

One man reported seeing two young men with similar features moving toward the rocks.

He described them as calm and did not notice anything unusual.

This was the only corroborated testimony for that day.

By nightfall, the dogs returned three times to the spot where the scent disappears.

In the protocols, this is labeled as a sudden and complete break in the scent trail, which is atypical of cases where a person simply leaves the trail.

In most situations, the odor is transferred to vegetation or stone surfaces.

This is not the case here.

The nightly report from the command post concludes that the disappearance occurred within a small area, but no secondary traces of movement exist.

No traces of shoes, fabric, fragments of equipment, or any other objects were found.

Visibility and weather conditions could not have completely erased these tracks.

Over the next few hours, rescuers expanded the perimeter to service roads that had been used many years ago to access old technical areas.

The final report for the day states, “All available logical directions of movement have been checked.

The route after the point of disappearance of the trail is not restored.

The search continues, but the exit from the canyon, which should have shown at least minimal signs of movement of the two people, remains completely empty.

October 2015.

In the morning, a park service patrol was traveling along a service road that runs along the southern border of Red Rocks.

According to the ranger driving the vehicle, he noticed a person about a few dozen yards ahead of him, a figure moving slowly with an uneven gate.

The car was stopped and the two officers moved closer.

The young man was dirty and showed clear signs of exhaustion, but not of the level typically seen after prolonged unassisted wilderness exposure.

The first patrol report stated that he maintained his balance, but reacted with delay.

According to one of the rangers, the unidentified man looked like he had spent a long time in harsh conditions, but not in a state of complete physical decline.

The patrol immediately tried to identify him.

The dash cam video shows the guy trying to answer questions, pausing between words.

A ranger standing to the right said he heard a phrase that he recorded in the report.

Brian Bridges.

This was the key.

through the central dispatch center.

The information was checked against the case of the missing tourists, which was closed a year ago.

His identity was confirmed in a few minutes.

When asked where he had been all this time, the guy gave a short, vague answer.

According to the ranger, he only said, “I don’t remember anything but the quarry and the sunset.

” He did not provide any further explanation.

In the park services summary log, this phrase was labeled as an incomplete reproducible memory with no way to verify its accuracy.

Brian was placed in a patrol car and taken to the nearest medical aid station.

According to the doctor who received him, the young man was disoriented in time and place, but responded to direct requests.

The initial medical report stated that his general condition was in need of stabilization, but not critical.

The body parameters were consistent with a person who had experienced significant stress and a certain period of water shortage, but did not correspond to the state after a year of complete isolation in a desert environment.

The doctors recorded only general indicators, moderate dehydration, fatigue, signs of injuries of different times, but without a clear chronology.

The document emphasizes that their structure and age do not allow us to reconstruct the sequence of events.

It is also stated that the body weight indicators are not consistent with long-term survival without regular access to food.

Brian’s clothing is described only superficially, dirty, torn in several places, but with fragments that looked unevenly worn.

The service record notes that the extent of the damage does not allow us to determine the conditions in which he was held.

The doctors did not record any details except that his appearance did not allow us to estimate the duration of his stay in the external environment.

After his condition stabilized, the young man was transferred to a separate room for further observation.

In the medical journal, there is a record that he periodically raised his head to answer questions, but answered only in separate words that did not make up the full picture.

All attempts to recreate the events of the past year caused him to have long pauses and reduced verbal responses.

The Park Service patrol forwarded all the information to the sheriff’s department.

Their report emphasized several key points which were recorded independently by different officers.

That Brian was able to move independently.

That his physical condition was inconsistent with the prolonged absence of food and water.

That his response regarding his last memory was brief and incomplete.

That he had no backpack equipment or any items that hikers typically disappear with at the time of discovery.

The time and exact location of the discovery were also indicated.

Data from the patrol’s GPS device.

The coordinates pointed to an area that was not included in the initial search a year ago.

The log describes it as a service road not used by regular visitors and remote from tourist routes.

The doctors kept brief notes on his condition in the first hours.

alertness level reduced, attention unstable, fragmented memories.

They noted that he was unable to answer questions about the events of the past year.

All of his words recorded in the protocols referred to the moment he called the last, the quarry and the sunset.

At this point, the official records only record that he was found alive, that he needed medical attention, that he was unable to provide consistent information about his whereabouts throughout the year, and that his physical condition contained inconsistencies that required further verification.

Following the confirmation of Brian Bridges’s identity, the case, which was officially closed almost a year ago, returned to active investigation.

Internal transmissions logs indicate that Detective Sarah Mendoza, one of the few investigators in the department who worked on long-term disappearances in remote areas, received the materials the same day.

Mendoza’s first step was to review the medical summary.

There was only one short technical note in it.

The boy’s general condition did not correspond to a year in isolation.

The detective wrote it down in her working notes without any conclusions or assumptions.

In her initial report, this note is listed as a factor requiring additional assessment.

After that, she proceeded to examine the personal belongings that had been removed from the boy’s clothes.

One object appeared in the report of the locker room that did not exist in the materials drawn up during the initial disappearance.

It was a homemade metal badge, flat, uneven in shape, with a handapplied symbol of three vertical silver shapes.

The technician who performed the recovery described them as rocks or columns.

The token was officially registered as a separate unit of analysis.

The next morning, Mendoza reviewed the protocol for handing over the items to the family.

The badge was not recognized by Brian’s parents.

According to them, the boy did not wear jewelry, did not collect such items, and was not interested in symbols or signs.

His mother noted in the survey form that he never had anything like that.

The father confirmed this separately.

In the investigator’s official log, this testimony was recorded as a negative identification.

At this point, Mendoza turned her attention to another family, the family of Paul Miller.

The boy went missing the same day as Brian, but has not yet been found.

The case file contained a previous contact with them made a year ago, but no new information was available.

The detective decided to inform them of the first real lead in a long time.

The protocol of the service call indicates that Paul’s father responded with restraint, but asked for any information that could even theoretically help.

The mother said that they had watched the news about Brian’s discovery, but no one had officially contacted them.

During a follow-up interview, Paul’s parents confirmed that their son was wearing clothes that day that were not among those found on Brian.

They also noted that Paul never wore metal dog tags or homemade jewelry.

Mendoza’s work note contains a short entry.

The dog tag is not associated with the family.

Next, the detective pulled up all the materials from the search operation conducted a year ago.

The maps showed that the area where Brian was found was not part of the main perimeter of the search.

The service road along which the patrol moved was then marked as inaccessible with frequent landslides.

The rangers did not consider it a potential route for the missing boys due to the lack of a logical approach to it from the calico tank trail.

Mendoza recorded this fact as a data point to be checked.

She then watched the video from the dash cam of the patrol that found the boy.

The recording shows Brian reacting to the request, but he does not mention any reference point other than his career.

The report described his behavior as partial response with fragmented memories.

The lack of mention of any events between the day of the disappearance and the day of the recovery was unusual.

Mendoza’s journal for that day contains a few brief notes.

Object of unknown origin present.

First time in a year.

Physical evidence not previously present.

No link to family or friends.

Limited recall.

Only one recurring memory fragment.

The detective’s next step was to gather information about where Brian might have obtained the homemade metal object.

She noticed the nature of the engraving.

uneven lines created by hand.

In her report, she pointed out that this kind of object is usually made by small groups of people or in places where there is access to simple metal tools.

Importantly, neither family nor friends recognize the symbol.

In an additional comment, Brian’s sister, who was interviewed separately, said that he didn’t wear anything like that.

This was recorded in the official report as a complete lack of a match.

Mendoza assembled an initial folder of the most important documents.

The initial report from the scene, the medical report, the patrol camera video, and a copy of the photo of the badge.

All of them were marked as materials requiring further analysis.

As a result of this stage, she had only two real facts that could form the basis for further action.

First, Brian was found in a place that was not part of the initial search.

Second, he had an object whose origin could not be explained by any of his family members.

These two points were the first traces that indicated that the year of his disappearance was not a random walk in the desert.

After her first two days on the job, Detective Sarah Mendoza formed an initial version of events, which the department unofficially called internal suspicion.

It was standard for cases where one of the two missing persons suddenly appears without explanation and the other remains unknown.

This version was recorded in the official log under the general formula.

Possible interpersonal conflict followed by intentional disappearance.

In an informal conversation, one of the senior detectives said that the disappearance of two people and the return of one always requires an investigation into involvement.

This was the starting point of the work.

The first argument in favor of suspicion was that Brian had not provided any consistent information about Paul’s whereabouts.

All reports indicate that he was unable to name a single landmark, an intermediate point, or an event between the day he disappeared and the day he was found.

The official analytical note states, “The complete absence of memories in the presence of some clear fragments is atypical.

” This was the first factor that the department considered as a possible deliberate evasion.

The second point concerned the very fact of his appearance.

The park services summary log records that the area where Brian was found is not a logical route for someone who was lost or someone seeking to return to the settlements.

The service road along which he was walking is practically unused by visitors and has no access from the Calico Tank Trail.

The internal analytical report states, “The location of the discovery does not coincide with the basic behavioral patterns of people trying to leave the canyon on their own.

” This was the second factor that raised doubts.

The third argument was based on the boy’s behavior during the first contact.

According to one of the rangers, Brian reacted selectively as if he was controlling what to say.

In the work of a detective, such behavior always appears as a risk of hidden information.

Mendoza wrote in her notes, “Slective amnesia or deliberate partial silence is possible.

” The Psychiatric Report on psychoggenic amnesia did not rule out this version, as such disorders sometimes mask a conscious blocking of memories.

Within 2 days of the disappearance, the detective reviewed all available maps of the disappearance.

She worked with original materials from a year ago, including a topographical map of the quarry and surrounding passages.

While checking the documentation, she found a note in an old archival report indicating that an illegal datomite mine had once operated near the disappearance area.

The document dated before the recreational area mentioned an atypical network of technical shelters dug into the upper rock layer.

This information was not taken into account during the initial search because the facility was officially closed and mothalled.

Mendoza asked the park service for old maps.

In response, she received two archival maps that did indeed show technical passages leading from the quarry to several points where service roads now run.

This map did not answer the question of where Brian was for a year, but it did explain a possible route he could have taken to reach his location.

The detective labeled it a hypothetical movement corridor.

However, at the same time, she noted that no open trail leads to these passages and their condition is officially classified as emergency.

At the same time, the investigation began questioning unauthorized persons who might have been in the canyon area then or now.

The first person to give information was a man who was not on any official list, a local named Lester.

He approached the rangers himself after the radio signaled the reopening of the case.

The protocol states that Lester stated his willingness to tell what he saw.

According to Lester, during the night hours during the summer and fall of last year, he noticed several times in the canyon vehicles without license plates or with blacked out plates.

He described them as dark-colored SUVs, older models, but in good condition.

According to him, they were traveling on official roads which were closed to civilians.

The report notes that Lester could not explain the purpose of their stay, but emphasized that the movement took place late at night.

In the same testimony, he also mentioned people wearing masks.

According to him, he saw two such people at a distance, moving between rocky outcroppings, moving in a coordinated manner as if they were performing a task.

Lester described them as people in dark clothes with light colored masks on their faces.

The document emphasizes that he could not determine their age, gender, or origin.

The most puzzling part of his testimony was the mention of words he heard very briefly.

According to Lester, one day while walking along a dry stream bed, he heard a phrase that he translated as follows: Silver Bear.

He could not explain the context, only that he heard it from one of the men near the SUV.

Not sure if it’s a name or a reference.

Mendoza recorded this information as testimony that needs to be verified.

The wording Silver Bear did not match any known organization operating in the district, nor did it match any commercial entities or tourist groups.

This fragment was recorded in a separate column of the worklog as unidentified identifier.

At this stage, two lines of evidence emerged in the case file.

The first is the official one according to which Brian could have been involved in Paul’s disappearance and deliberately withheld information.

The second unverified but potentially significant was evidence of unauthorized persons car traffic in the restricted area and an unknown time frame that required further analysis.

Neither of them provided answers at this stage, but both remained in the works.

After receiving Lester’s statement, Detective Sarah Mendoza expanded the tentative list of possible targets.

In an internal memo, she noted that the phrase repeated by the witness, Silverbear, was not included in any official database of names registered within the county.

However, the Economic Crimes Department kept an old certificate on a number of private facilities that did not work with a mass audience and had closed access.

It was there that the match first appeared.

The list of private lands in the desert area that had once been investigated for land use violations included a complex registered under a commercial name that included the word bear.

The documentation was incomplete because the facility had a closed access regime and the owners regularly changed legal entities.

Mendoza filed a request for archival materials and received several brief inquiries.

The facility was off the main tourist routes, had private security, and did not hold public events.

After checking the data with a topographic map, the detective noted that the facility was located in relative proximity to service roads, which Lester said were used by cars.

In her service log, she wrote down, “Location is consistent with directions witness could see from lower canyon terraces.

” This was not proof, but it gave grounds for additional analysis.

The second coincidence appeared during the study of symbolism.

An appendix to the archival reference contained a copy of an old advertising booklet for the complex.

It was dated before it was closed to the public.

The booklet’s cover featured a sign.

Three vertical figures stylized as rock formations.

They had a silver hue applied in a manner similar to a rough metal marker.

Mendoza checked the box next to this element as a visual match to homemade object number one.

After receiving this document, the detective sent an official request to the register of private clubs.

Officially, the object had a name that did not mention the silver bear, but additional fields in the register indicated side commercial names.

One of them was the same as the term Lester had mentioned.

The commentary to the registration number indicated that the facility belonged to the category of closed clubs with non-disclosure of the list of members.

This meant that members had to sign confidentiality agreements.

The investigation received documents that shed only partial light on the activities of the complex.

A report from a few years ago on land use violations mentioned that the territory hosted events described as extreme programs for a limited group of clients.

A second document related to tax audits mentioned expenses for special equipment for simulations and technical structures of a temporary nature.

All these records were marked as no detailed information available due to the closed membership status.

Mendoza summarized this information in a working report.

The activities of the complex could include organized events related to physical testing and staged scenarios.

The documents were vague in their description, but all included phrases such as entertainment sessions of increased complexity, behavioral programs under the supervision of instructors, and special thematic events.

An unofficial note from one of the inspectors drawn up during an inspection several years ago contained a short phrase, “The institution operates on the principle of exclusivity, special selection, and high fees.

” Mendoza noted this as a sign that the club’s clients could be people of high financial status.

After that, the detective filed a request for possible complaints related to the facility.

In response, she received three anonymous complaints made in different years.

All of them mentioned noise at night and the movement of off-road vehicles along closed roads.

Since the appeals were anonymous and did not contain specific evidence, they were not considered at the time.

However, now they have become additional indicators of activity in the restricted area.

The information from a separate file concerning insurance payments turned out to be important.

It indirectly mentioned risky activities and people’s participation in scenario simulations.

The wording was not detailed, but it indicated that the club organized events in which real participants took part under the conditional supervision of instructors.

Mendoza made the following notes in her workbook.

The facility is closed and not accessible to the public.

There is symbolism that matches the object found on Brian.

There is evidence of the use of the territory for extreme programs.

There may be nighttime traffic.

There is circumstantial evidence that coincides with the time of the boy’s disappearance.

Additional attention was drawn to an internal document on seasonal events that included the word sessions.

The explanatory note stated that such events took place several times a year and involved behavioral models with real participants.

The document did not contain any direct explanation of who the participants were.

After studying these materials, Mendoza formed a working version which appears in her internal report entitled Potential Contact with a closed private entity.

In this report, she also noted that the only physical object found in Brian’s possession that had any meaningful connection to external information was a metal badge.

Its symbol completely matched the sign of the complex.

It was the first direct match in the entire investigation.

The Silver Bear Club did not appear in any of the official mass registers, did not advertise its services, and was not accessible to outsiders.

The documents described it as an isolated private complex with special access conditions.

The explanatory note to one of the archival checks contained a short phrase.

Ethical standards of activity are not established.

At this stage, the investigation still viewed Brian as a potential participant in the events.

But for the first time, a line appeared that could indicate outside influence.

It was this line that became the new direction of work.

The initiative that changed the course of the investigation came not from the work of detectives, but from a voluntary statement.

According to the registration log of the district prosecutor’s office, a man who introduced himself as a former security guard at a private complex associated with the word bear contacted the office on his own.

He stated that he had worked at the complex for over a year and was ready to give full testimony about the facility’s activities.

The prosecutor’s office agreed to partial immunity.

The written agreement, which was attached to the case file, states that the man did not belong to the management team, performed the functions of monitoring and admission in peripheral areas, and his duties did not include actions that caused harm to people.

He was guaranteed immunity only if he fully disclosed the structure of the complex, identified the responsible persons and places used to hold people.

The first interrogation was conducted with the participation of Detective Sarah Mendoza, a prosecutor, and another investigator.

The protocol records that the man provided information without objection, and answered quickly, but with signs of nervousness.

He immediately recognized that the facility had an internal system that the staff called the runner program.

The interrogation report reproduces his words.

The runners are not athletes or actors.

They are people who were kept in technical shelters and their role is to move around the territory during seasonal games.

They could not refuse.

They were held by force.

That’s the way it is inside.

The detective clarified the meaning of the term.

The man explained that the word was used only in the complex.

According to him, the runners lived in isolated rooms that were once equipped for mine chambers.

They were not let out except for the days when the so-called seasonal events were held.

These were staged scenarios involving the club’s clients.

The document emphasizes that the security guard did not have access to the senior administration.

So he did not know the details of the organization of the events.

He claimed that the lower level staff was only informed of the schedule and lists of places to be guarded.

His words from the protocol.

We did not call them by name, only by number.

There were not many of them.

We kept them alive because we needed real people for the games.

He went on to describe a moment that directly concerned Brian and Paul.

According to the guard, while preparing for the fall session, a term he used to describe one of the seasonal events, two outsiders accidentally found themselves on the service road.

This happened on a stretch of road that the service considered to be completely closed.

The protocol states, “At first, we thought they were two new runners who were brought in unannounced, but they did not behave like that.

They weren’t waiting for us.

” The guard said that one of the guys started to back away and resisted when the staff tried to block their path.

A few seconds later, he slipped on an unstable area and fell into a narrow technical crack.

His words, “We were shining down.

It was too narrow.

You can’t get a live person out of there.

That’s what we were told.

The document adds a technical note.

The guard could not determine whether any of the lower level personnel went down, but he claimed that the decision not to touch was made by the senior staff.

Regarding the second guy, he said that the staff had received a verbal order to transfer him to the lower group.

This meant that he was to be subjected to a similar regime of detention to other runners.

quote from the testimony.

He was identified as a participant.

They said he would go to the next session.

The guard added that he was kept separately from the others to avoid contact.

He could not say how much time passed between the detention and the start of the training.

He saw Brian only a few times during the changing of the guard in the underpass.

An important detail is noted in the protocol.

The guard emphasized that the lower level staff did not pursue or physically assault the runners.

They only made sure that they stayed in the designated areas.

We didn’t manage the games.

We just stood where we were told.

In the final part of the interrogation, he provided a schematic description of the network of shelters from memory.

He identified one of the corridors as the place where they kept the new one.

This information partially coincided with the archival maps of the old datomite mine that Mendoza had received earlier.

The prosecutor added a memo.

The security guard’s testimony contradicted the initial version of Brian’s involvement in Paul’s disappearance.

At this stage, he was the first witness to confirm that the boys had become bystanders to the complex’s activities and had not voluntarily participated in them.

After receiving the security guard’s testimony, Detective Sarah Mendoza summarized the key pieces of information regarding the term runners.

An internal analytical report based on the interrogation protocols states that the runners at the complex were people who were used in the so-called seasonal games.

The security guard himself explained this wording more clearly than any archival documents.

He noted that these people were released into a specific area of the canyon where they were chased by the club’s clients.

The report describes these as controlled hunting scenarios using a live person.

The senior administration of the complex did not officially acknowledge the existence of such programs, but the security guard’s testimony was specific enough for the investigation to get a structured idea of what was happening in the underground part of the territory for the first time.

Mendoza’s service log contains a brief entry.

The runner is a participant in a forced scenario who is in the status of an object, not a consensual participant.

The same block of the document contains a comment from the psychiatrist who examined Brian after the discovery.

The boy’s fragmentaryary memories, running, darkness, hiding places that he uttered in a state of disorientation may correspond to the behavior of a person who has experienced prolonged episodes of persecution.

Based on the combination of these data, the investigation reconstructed a possible picture of the events that Brian experienced during the period of his disappearance.

In the internal report, this part is labeled as a conditional reconstruction based on the guard’s words, the boy’s behavioral reactions in the early days, and indirect medical evidence.

After Paul’s fall, which the guard described as sudden and inevitable, the staff of the complex transferred the second boy to the underground part where the other runners were kept.

The security guard’s testimony states that Brian was in a state of shock and did not actively resist.

He looked at the floor and did not react to the people around him.

The investigation materials do not contain the exact timing, but the guard said that the boy was assigned to a group that was to participate in the next session.

In this context, the word assigned meant that he was one of those who were released into the canyon during the games.

The protocol contains a quote from a witness.

He did not know the rules.

He just stood there when we started him up.

According to the guard, Brian was kept for a long time in a small technical shelter, a room that used to be part of the mine network.

According to him, these cells were not equipped as living quarters.

The summary document states, “The places of detention are temporary cells with minimal conditions designed to restrict freedom of movement.

” According to his testimony, preparations for the seasonal games included waiting periods when the runners were not touched and short intensive stages when they were brought to the surface.

A witness described it as follows.

They were told to run.

They were not trained.

We just gave them the direction.

The documents do not contain any information on whether Brian realized during these events that he was being pursued by his clients.

However, the investigation noted that the boy’s behavior after being detected, alertness, reaction to loud noises, lack of response to questions about space is consistent with experiencing prolonged stress related to the persecution.

According to the guard, Brian was a participant in such rounds several times.

The man could not give the exact dates because the lower level staff did not receive schedules in advance.

But the protocol contains the following phrase.

They took him out several times.

He was running slower than the others.

The investigation does not have accurate data on the duration of these events, but the summary document compiled after analyzing all available evidence states, “It is likely that the boy became a regular participant in the forced movement programs over a significant period of time.

” The same document contains information about escape attempts.

The guard reported that Brian twice tried to get out through technical holes.

The memo emphasized that most of these holes did not lead to the outside, but to outdated areas of the mine where movement was dangerous and virtually impossible.

A quote from a security guard.

He was looking for ways in the dark.

We saw that he did not understand where to go.

Both attempts were unsuccessful.

The staff returned him to the detention center.

According to the guard, the last attempt happened at night when one of the guards on duty fell asleep at his post.

The man explained that this was a violation of discipline, but there was little control at the lower level of security.

Brian went out through a halfopen technical passage that led to a peripheral ledge.

A witness said, “He just disappeared.

We found traces of sand, but we didn’t find him.

” The investigation then reconstructed the approximate route of the boy’s movement based on the place where he was found.

The documents indicate that he could have moved in fragments between rocky outcroppings along dried up streams and that the path was indirect.

Archival maps do not allow us to establish a specific route, but there is reason to believe that he spent no more than a few days on the move until he reached the service road where he was discovered.

In the summary part of the work log, the detective noted based on the testimony, it was determined that Brian was under the control of the complex’s staff, participated in a scenario pursuit against his will, attempted to escape, and eventually went to the outside area through a technical opening to which access was not controlled.

It was at this stage that the investigation first formed a clear picture of the events that could have happened to the boy during the entire period of his disappearance.

After completing interrogations, verifying the testimony of the guard and checking information with archival maps of the old datomite mine, the investigation formed a coherent conclusion about the activities of the complex known as the silver bear.

The prosecutor’s office report states that three independent groups, technical, legal, and operational, confirmed that there was a hidden structure of forced detention on the territory of the complex.

This data included personnel flowcharts, internal expense records, testimony from a security guard, and a visual match to the symbols on a badge found in Brian Bridg’s clothing.

Based on this, the district prosecutor’s office filed a motion with the court to completely close the complex.

The judge’s ruling states that the facility does not meet security requirements and its activities bear signs of organized criminal activity.

The same document contains a resolution on authorized searches throughout the complex, including old technical shelters.

During these searches, investigators found numerous traces of human presence, including old door locks, elements of makeshift sleeping arrangements, long-term storage products, and a number of items that could have been used to control movement.

Mendoza’s working report includes a note.

The structure of the shelters confirms the guard’s testimony regarding the method of detention.

This phrase became key during the final coordination of evidence.

After the initial investigative actions were completed, arrest warrants were issued for the management of the complex.

The arrests took place simultaneously in several locations.

The county department’s official report states that the operation involved the sheriff’s department, federal agents, and a technical support team as part of the complex was fenced and had surveillance cameras.

The detainees were taken to a detention center and additional testimony was added to the case from lower level employees who had not previously given explanations.

At the same time, the case file contains information about the status of Brian Bridges.

After reviewing all the testimony, evidence, and his own medical history, he was officially recognized as a victim of a criminal offense.

The prosecutor’s office noted that there were no grounds to believe that he was involved in the activities of the complex, participation in crimes or actions that could have led to the death of Paul Miller.

The prosecutor’s memo quotes the following phrase.

From the available evidence, it follows that he was in the status of a person deprived of his liberty and his movements were controlled by unauthorized people.

Paul Miller’s parents were informed of the results of the investigation separately.

The relevant police log contains a note about two meetings with the family.

During the first, they were provided with general information about the activities of the complex.

During the second, they were informed that the evidence collected confirmed that their son had died as a result of an accidental fall.

The family refused to have mediators present.

The minutes of the meeting state, the reaction is restrained.

There are few questions.

Please receive copies of the documents after the completion of the court procedures.

The documents on Brian’s rehabilitation process contain information about consultations with a psychologist that he had in the first weeks after the case was closed.

The psychologist’s report states that the boy demonstrates behavior that indicates long-term stress, avoids talking about the events that took place during his disappearance, and cannot clearly articulate memories related to the period of his stay in the complex.

The psychologist emphasized that Brian did not show signs of aggression or resistance, but had episodes of anxiety when mentioning the quarry or underground passages.

Investigators documented that the boy tried several times to explain why he was unable to get Paul out or call for help.

However, his explanations were fragmentaryary.

The psychiatrist’s journal contains a note.

The subject has a persistent sense of guilt for an event that he could not influence.

These conclusions were included in the case not as factual evidence, but as part of the description of the emotional state.

The final report of the district prosecutor’s office states that Brian Bridges is not legally responsible as his participation in the actions of the complex was forced and inseparable from the conditions of illegal detention.

The same document states that the boy remains a key witness but does not require restriction of liberty.

A separate fragment of the collected materials concerns his life after the completion of investigative procedures.

It states that he can navigate everyday situations, but periods of anxiety arise when he recalls his experiences, the final description drawn up by the social worker states, “The subject demonstrates internal tension related to events over which he had no control and experiences the loss of his friend as his own fault.

” Another phrase appears in the same document.

When asked about the future, he says that he wants to avoid any places that look like canyons or closed areas.

Thus, according to the official case file, the Silver Bear Club was liquidated, the management arrested, and the system of detention was revealed.

But even after that, the investigation noted that the psychological consequences of the events became a separate part of the story for Brian, which is not subject to legal assessment.

In an internal memo assessing the witness’s condition, the investigator stated, “He came out of the red rocks alive, but the events he experienced form a state that does not allow him to be called completely Free.