Detective Sergeant Claiborne's Scene Notes: Det. S. Lahey Initial Account
On 2 August 2018 at Jeffries Manor, Detective Sergeant Charles Claiborne found Detective Sarah Lahey in shock following her partner's disappearance. Unable to give a formal statement, Lahey provided a fragmented account: Detective Jenkins entered a shed to confront suspect Luke Smith, she heard a motorbike sound whilst inside with witnesses, and returned to find both men vanished from the empty shed. Claiborne documented her traumatised state, noted her confusion about the inexplicable disappearance, and ordered her home to rest, expressing concerns about her psychological condition and noting she would require formal debriefing the following day.
INCIDENT 2018-08-02/14387 - JEFFRIES MANOR
Date: 2 August 2018
Time: 15:45 - 16:20 hrs
Location: Jeffries Manor, Granton
Reporting Officer: Det. Sgt. Charlie Claiborne, Badge #2847
Subject: Initial Scene Assessment & Det. S. Lahey Informal Account
SCENE ARRIVAL:
Arrived on scene at 15:42 hrs in response to Priority One backup call for CITY632 (Det. Sr. Karl Jenkins and Det. Sarah Lahey) following report of suspect Luke Smith detained at location.
Upon arrival, found scene in state of considerable chaos:
- Multiple civilian witnesses in various states of distress
- Primary witness Louise Jeffries extremely agitated, reporting Det. Jenkins "disappeared"
- Det. Sarah Lahey located sitting in dirt approximately 15 metres from shed structure, appeared to be in shock
- No sign of Det. Sr. Karl Jenkins or suspect Luke Smith
- Shed structure appeared empty upon initial visual assessment
CONDITION OF DET. S. LAHEY:
Found Det. Lahey sitting on ground near shed, knees drawn up, head in hands. Appeared disoriented and severely distressed. Approached cautiously and identified myself.
Det. Lahey looked up - face streaked with dirt and tears, hands visibly shaking. She attempted to stand when she saw me but legs gave way. I helped her to her feet and moved her to lean against shed wall for support.
INITIAL EXCHANGE:
Me: "Sarah, what happened? Where's Karl?"
Det. Lahey: [long pause, staring at shed] "I don't know. He went in. He didn't come out."
Me: "You're saying Det. Jenkins entered the shed?"
Det. Lahey: [nodding] "With Luke. Luke Smith. Louise - the homeowner - she had him trapped in there. Karl went in to confront him."
Me: "And then what?"
Det. Lahey: [voice breaking] "I was inside with Louise. I heard - I don't know what I heard. Like an engine. Motorbike maybe. I came out and..." [gesture towards empty shed] "Nothing. Both gone. Just gone."
ATTEMPT AT DETAILED ACCOUNT:
Tried to get coherent sequence of events. Det. Lahey's account fragmented and difficult to follow due to her distressed state. Following is pieced together from multiple attempts:
- She and Det. Jenkins responded to call re: Luke Smith detained at location
- Witness Louise Jeffries met them outside, extremely agitated, armed with kitchen knife
- Louise claimed Luke Smith was in shed
- Det. Jenkins approached shed to confront Smith
- Det. Lahey escorted Louise Jeffries inside manor house (elderly grandmother Thelma also inside)
- Whilst inside, Det. Lahey heard sound described as "motorbike starting"
- Det. Lahey exited house, ran to shed
- Found shed empty - no Det. Jenkins, no Luke Smith, no motorbike
- Det. Lahey collapsed, called for backup
NOTABLE OBSERVATIONS:
Det. Lahey kept repeating certain phrases:
- "They were just here"
- "I don't understand"
- "The shed was empty" (said multiple times with visible distress)
- "I should have stayed with him"
When I asked directly what she thought had happened, she said: "I don't know. Charlie, I don't know. One minute Karl was there, then I heard that sound, and when I got out here, the shed was completely empty. How does that happen? How do two men just disappear?"
PHYSICAL EVIDENCE MENTIONED BY DET. LAHEY:
When I asked if she'd observed any evidence of struggle or departure, she mentioned:
- Shed door was ajar when she arrived
- Interior appeared "disturbed" but couldn't specify how
- No blood, no obvious signs of violence
- No tyre tracks she could see (though she admitted she hadn't looked carefully, was too focused on finding Karl)
- "Everything was just... gone"
ASSESSMENT OF DET. LAHEY'S STATE:
Det. Lahey is clearly in shock and possibly traumatised. Her professional composure has completely broken down. She was:
- Physically shaking
- Unable to maintain eye contact for more than brief moments
- Repeatedly losing track of what she was saying
- Showing signs of dissociation (staring blankly, delayed responses)
- Fixated on the shed, kept looking at it as if expecting something to change
At one point she said: "I've lost him, Charlie. I've lost my partner." Then immediately corrected herself: "Not lost. He's missing. We'll find him. We have to find him."
DECISION RE: DET. LAHEY:
Given Det. Lahey's state and the fact that she is now both a witness and potentially a secondary victim in this incident, made the following decisions:
- Did NOT take formal witness statement - Det. Lahey not in appropriate mental state
- Instructed Det. Lahey to go home, rest, and report to station tomorrow for formal debrief
- Advised her she would likely be removed from active investigation due to personal involvement
- Ensured she was fit to drive before allowing her to leave (she insisted she was, though I had doubts)
Det. Lahey resisted leaving initially, wanted to participate in search. I was firm: "Sarah, you're exhausted. You're in shock. Go home. That's not a request, that's an order."
She nodded but said: "You'll find him, won't you Charlie? You'll find Karl?"
I told her we'd do everything possible. She left at approximately 16:05 hrs in her vehicle.
CONCERNS:
I am concerned about Det. Lahey's emotional and psychological state. Her account, while consistent in basic facts, was delivered with significant distress and confusion. She appears to be struggling to process what she witnessed (or didn't witness - the absence of explanation seems to be what's most disturbing to her).
Additionally, there are elements of her account that raise questions:
- The "motorbike sound" she heard (no motorbike has been located)
- The complete absence of Det. Jenkins and Luke Smith with no apparent means of departure
- Her statement that the shed was "completely empty" - forensics will need to verify
Det. Lahey has been partners with Det. Jenkins for several years. The personal and professional implications of his disappearance on her are significant.
SUBSEQUENT SCENE ACTIVITIES:
Following Det. Lahey's departure:
- Secured shed as potential crime scene
- Interviewed witness Louise Jeffries (separate notes)
- Checked on elderly witness Thelma Jeffries (upstairs, confused but unharmed)
- Initiated property-wide search for Det. Jenkins and Luke Smith
- Called for additional units and forensic support
- Established perimeter and began systematic search of surrounding bushland
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS:
- No sign of Det. Jenkins or Luke Smith on property
- No vehicles departed property (only entrance monitored via witness Louise who was present throughout)
- Shed contains minimal contents - some tools on walls, but largely empty
- Forensics later located tyre tracks leading from shed that terminate abruptly (no clear continuation)
- No evidence of violence or struggle in shed
- No blood, no weapon discharge evidence, no signs of physical altercation
STATUS AS OF 16:20 HRS:
- Det. Sr. Karl Jenkins: MISSING
- Luke Nathaniel Smith: MISSING
- Brianne Sitch (separate but potentially related disappearance): MISSING
- Det. Sarah Lahey: Sent home, formal statement pending
- Search ongoing
- Major incident protocols activated
- Media liaison notified (media hold requested pending family notifications)
PERSONAL ASSESSMENT:
In my extensive years of service, I have never encountered a disappearance of this nature. Two men entered a shed with no other exits. One witness (Det. Lahey) heard unidentified sound. Upon investigation, both men had vanished without apparent means of departure. Physical evidence (tyre tracks terminating abruptly) suggests vehicle departure but no vehicle observed leaving property and no vehicle located.
Det. Lahey's distress appears genuine and profound. Either she witnessed something she cannot adequately explain, or she is concealing information - at this stage, I believe the former is more likely. She appeared genuinely confused and traumatised by the inexplicable nature of events.
Det. Jenkins is a respected senior detective. His disappearance during what should have been a routine suspect detention is deeply concerning for the entire department.
Investigation ongoing.
NOTES COMPILED BY:
Detective Sergeant Charlie Claiborne, Badge #2847
DATE FILED: 2 August 2018, 17:30 hrs
FILE REFERENCE: Case 2018-08-02/14387 (Jenkins Disappearance)
STATUS: ACTIVE INVESTIGATION - CRITICAL INCIDENT
DISTRIBUTION: Det. Inspector Mason Wright, Det. Sr. Stout, Case File
ADDENDUM - 3 AUGUST 2018:
Det. Sarah Lahey failed to report to station for scheduled debrief at 09:00 hrs on 3 August. Multiple attempts to contact via mobile unsuccessful. Sent patrol unit to her residence at 10:15 hrs - vehicle not present at address.
Det. Lahey eventually located [time and circumstances to be documented separately]. Formal interview with Det. Sr. Alexander Stout scheduled for 14:30 hrs, 3 August.
Given Det. Lahey's behaviour (failure to report, being uncontactable, subsequent actions), recommend full investigation into her activities between departing Jeffries Manor on 2 August and formal interview on 3 August.
—C. Claiborne
