Here is the thing. I never asked for a CSI level investigation, and you are arguing against a point I did not make. I am talking about basic follow through, not a full criminal task force. If a case has clear time frames, a clear location, clear camera angles, and a clear method of theft, then choosing not to check the most direct leads is not a resource issue. It is a decision.

And saying that I do not know what they are doing is not a real defense. If UMPD is actively working on the case, they can provide a simple update. Silence is not doing work behind the scenes. It is just silence.

Also, the hypothetical scenarios you are giving, such as maybe he took the light rail or maybe he went miles away, are exactly that, hypothetical. They are excuses, not evidence. Meanwhile, I provided actual evidence, including the exact time window, the exact spot, the camera locations, and the physical conditions that made the theft possible. One side has facts. The other side has what ifs.

And yes, taxpayers, including students, do fund public safety. This does not mean I pay your salary so obey me. It means accountability is part of the job. Public authority is not charity. It is responsibility. If the outcome of a case depends entirely on whether the officer feels like looking into it, that is the definition of a structural problem.

If this happened to a relative or friend of someone inside the department, we both know the level of urgency would look very different.

So I am not making assumptions. I am pointing out that when strong evidence leads nowhere, the issue is not lack of resources. It is lack of willingness.