Security Breach Assessment
Re: The D.K. Bakal Publication
Internal Memorandum · Office of the Chief of Police · 13th Precinct · Strictly Confidential
It has come to my attention — as most things in this department do, via a combination of catastrophe and paperwork — that an unauthorised account of the Veridian Harvest investigation has been published by an individual known only as D.K. Bakal.
The publication, titled “The Case of the Vanishing V.I.P.: A Funny Cozy Mystery Detective Duo,” contains operationally sensitive details, accurate character descriptions, and — I am informed by Detective Tucker, who appears to have read it twice — “a really beautiful bit in Chapter Seven.” I have not read Chapter Seven. I have not read any chapter. This is my official position and I am committing to it.
Chief, you would love Chapter Seven. There’s a part where Stone does the thing with the timeline and it’s exactly like real life. — SMUT (I typed this before you could stop me)Given that this publication is now publicly available and that — despite the best efforts of the Commissioner’s press office — readers appear to be finding it and enjoying it, this office is issuing the following formal assessment. The purpose of this document is to contain the reputational and operational damage, not to provide a promotional summary of the publication.
[It will inevitably function as both. I am aware of this. I am choosing to proceed regardless. — B.O.S. Shaw]
Exhibit A — The Publication Itself
Exhibit B — Synopsis of Disclosed Information
The following is a factual summary of the operational details this publication has exposed to the general public. I am including it here because Legal has advised that “pretending the book doesn’t exist” is no longer a viable strategy.
The publication covers the Veridian Harvest investigation in full, including: the missing persons case involving the company’s lead scientist, the discovery of large-scale corporate fraud, the involvement of politically connected donors, and the department’s role in resolving what had been deliberately misclassified as an “unconventional case” to avoid scrutiny.
Also disclosed: Detective Tucker’s expense report for two dozen “seductive pastries.” His justification, reproduced verbatim in Chapter Four. His defence of this justification in Chapter Five. The fact that it worked. I cannot stress enough how much I did not want any of this in print.
For the record, the pastries were operationally essential and I stand by them. The witness provided information that closed the case. You’re welcome. — SMUTThe author has also, apparently, found the department’s website and added content to it. This was discovered when Detective Stone attempted to access the portal and found the homepage had been updated to include the motto: “Where Logic Takes a Holiday, but Justice Always Shows Up for Last Call.”
I have been told this cannot be removed without “breaking the whole thing.” IT is looking into it.
Exhibit C — Personnel Whose Identities Have Been Compromised
The following personnel are depicted in the publication. Threat assessments are based on narrative exposure, not actual security risk, which Legal has clarified I need to specify.
Det. Natalie Stone
Depicted accurately. Methods described correctly. Portrayed as competent. She has, against her own wishes, become something of a fan favourite. She is not pleased about this.
Det. S.M.U.T. Tucker
Depicted at length. Methods described with what the author calls “admiration.” Has read the book. Left a review. I found out about this on a Thursday. I am still processing it.
Spec. Fin Gibson
Depicted accurately. The “Forensi-Kills” podcast is mentioned. Listener numbers went up 340% the week after publication. He has since updated his podcast description to include “as featured in The Adventures of Detective SMUT.”
Sal Carlucci
The Mark IV Urban Assault Vending Unit is described in Chapter Eight. Sal has reportedly printed excerpts and laminated them to the cart. He says it is “good for business.” We cannot confirm this is untrue.
Exhibit D — Genre & Audience Classification
In the interest of fully documenting the scope of this breach, the following represents a complete classification of the publication’s genre positioning and target audience. This information is included for containment purposes and absolutely not to assist readers in finding the book.
Exhibit E — Comparable Works (Audience Cross-Reference)
Intelligence gathered from public review platforms indicates the publication is being recommended to readers of the following works. This information is included to assess audience reach. It is not a recommendation to investigate these works personally, though Detective Tucker has apparently read all of them and has opinions about each one.
| Comparable Work | Author / Source | Basis for Comparison |
|---|---|---|
| Stephanie Plum Series Frequently cited in reader reviews |
Janet Evanovich | Screwball detective comedy, laugh-out-loud chaos, protagonist whose effectiveness is inversely proportional to their tidiness |
| Thursday Murder Club Series High citation frequency |
Richard Osman | Witty ensemble detective team, cozy but clever, mysteries that take the reader by surprise while keeping them entertained |
| Miss Fortune Mystery Series Series readers crossing over |
Jana DeLeon | Humour-forward cozy mystery, unconventional investigator, long-running addictive series format |
| Jaine Austen Mystery Series Moderate citation frequency |
Laura Levine | Comedy and mystery in equal measure, warm character-driven whodunits, self-deprecating detective protagonist |
| Brooklyn Nine-Nine Most frequently cited |
Television Series | Workplace comedy in a police precinct setting, ensemble cast, comedy-first approach to crime-solving. Readers report the book “feels exactly like this in written form.” Tucker has watched every episode. Twice. |
| Only Murders in the Building Cited by multiple reviewers |
Television Series | Unlikely detective team, urban setting, character chemistry as primary appeal, mystery as the framework around it |
Exhibit F — Civilian Intelligence (Reader Reviews)
The following statements have been sourced from public review platforms and are included as evidence of the publication’s distribution reach. They are not testimonials. This office does not endorse testimonials.
“Genuinely laugh-out-loud funny. Tucker is the most chaotic, loveable disaster of a detective I’ve read in years. Finished Book 1 and immediately bought Book 2.”Amazon Verified Review — civilian source
“Perfect for fans of Brooklyn Nine-Nine. The banter between Stone and SMUT is exactly the kind of chemistry I didn’t know I needed in my mystery reading.”Amazon Verified Review — civilian source
“A cozy mystery that’s actually, genuinely funny. The mystery is clever, the characters are completely irresistible, and Stone is my new favourite detective.”Amazon Verified Review — civilian source
“Fast, funny, and unexpectedly touching. Sal the hot dog vendor alone is worth the price of admission. Read this in one sitting. Not sorry.”Amazon Verified Review — civilian source
Section VII — Conclusion & Recommended Action
The publication is out. The investigation into D.K. Bakal’s identity is ongoing. Containment of the existing material is, at this point, not operationally feasible.
This office’s position is as follows: we cannot prevent the public from reading this book. We cannot prevent Detective Tucker from discussing it with visitors to this portal. We cannot prevent Sal from laminating additional excerpts onto his cart.
What we can do is ensure the record reflects the official position of the 13th Precinct: the events depicted are classified, the author is unidentified, and any suggestion that this office found any portion of the publication amusing is categorically denied.
The investigation continues. If you have information regarding the identity of D.K. Bakal, please report it to this office immediately.
Do not leave tips on Sal’s cart. He is not an informant. He is a hot dog vendor. The distinction matters.
Department of Unconventional Crimes