Key discrepancies — Archive 001
Compare the repossession accounts, changing amount claimed, and requested accounting through the cleared documentary record.
Archive 001 follows Interstate Credit Union’s civil case against Gregory P. Moore II. Follow three comparisons through the documentary record: which vehicles were repossessed, how the amount claimed changed, and what accounting support was requested.
Reading rule: These are comparisons of statements in identified records. A pleading states a party's position; correspondence records what its author communicated; a court order establishes the decision it actually makes. Personal recollections and inferences belong to the separately labeled journal.
1. Three vehicles in the opening account; one in the later account
Earlier record — March 18–19, 2026
Interstate Credit Union’s original complaint identifies a 2003 Cadillac DeVille, a 1998 Ford F-150, and a 2015 Ford F-150. Paragraph 11 states: “The vehicles was repossessed on June 27, 2025.” Stacie Branch, identified in the filing as Interstate Credit Union’s President/CEO, signed the accompanying sworn verification on March 18; it was filed with the complaint on March 19.
Read A001-001 — Original Complaint and A001-002 — President/CEO Verification.
Later record — September 22–23, 2026
The September 23 deficiency letter reports that Interstate's September 22 discovery responses state the Cadillac and 1998 Ford were not repossessed and only the 2015 Ford was repossessed. The September 29 counterclaim pleading also records the Defendant's position concerning those responses.
Read A001-007 — Discovery Deficiency Letter and A001-012 — Amended Answer and Counterclaims.
What differs: The opening pleading's three-vehicle repossession account differs from the one-vehicle account reported in these later cleared sources. This comparison does not establish anyone's intent or a court finding of wrongdoing.
Source availability: The complete admission responses, A001-005, and production responses, A001-006, remain withheld pending publication review. The public trail here runs through the cleared derivatives identified above, rather than reproducing those held source files.
2. The amount claimed changed
Opening complaint — March 19, 2026
Interstate Credit Union alleged $32,035.42 in damages, with separate requests for legal fees, court costs, interest, and other relief. The complaint derivative reports two components: $6,209.70 and $25,825.72.
Source: A001-001.
Discovery account — reported September 23, 2026
The deficiency letter references a response stating that complete documentation supporting the $32,035.42 calculation had not been produced, the amount may be incorrect, and it was being worked on with “Christy.” This is what the letter reports from the response, not a separately published full response.
Source: A001-007.
Amended demand — September 25, 2026
The cleared September 29 pleading derivative describes the September 25 amended complaint as alleging at least $47,214.09.
Source: A001-012 — Amended Answer and Counterclaims. The full amended complaint, A001-008, remains withheld pending publication review.
Arithmetic check: $6,209.70 + $25,825.72 = $32,035.42. $32,035.42 + $15,178.67 = $47,214.09. These sums reconcile the figures quoted here; they do not establish the contractual basis, accuracy, or recoverability of those amounts.
3. A claimed deficiency and a request for the accounting behind it
AI-colorized illustrations based on photographs supplied in discovery. Colors are estimated and some fine details may differ from the source photographs. The originals are linked below each view.
See four more views of the F-150
Source: photograph pages 255–259 of Interstate’s production. Photograph dates have not been established. The September 23, 2026 letter, A001-007, reports a $700 private sale and $700 credit in the reviewed production.
What the September 23 letter records
The letter reports a $700 private sale and $700 credit in the production, and says its author had not located a single accounting or worksheet reproducing the $32,035.42 figure. It asks for balances, proceeds, expenses, adjustments, credits, and the account and contractual basis connecting them to the claimed deficiency.
What the later pleading requests
The September 29 pleading disputes that a lawful deficiency has been established and demands proof of the components of the amended amount.
What remains a documentary question: How do the underlying records connect the collateral disposition, proceeds and credits, account balances, and adjustments to the amount claimed? A record reported as not located in reviewed production is not the same as a finding that no such record exists.
Sources: A001-007 and A001-012.
Follow the sequence
March opening complaint and verification → May Answer → September discovery responses and deficiency letter → amended complaint → order granting leave and counterclaims.
The Chronology preserves the dates. The Document Index identifies the individual sources and release states. A001-011 — Order Granting Leave establishes procedural authorization to file; it is not a decision on the truth of the counterclaim allegations.
The experience beside the record
Two of the vehicles were still with me describes Gregory's recollection of receiving the lawsuit. Reading the responses against the lawsuit describes the later comparison. These journal entries are retrospective accounts, distinct from the documents.
Journal index · How to Read · Documentary Method
Submit a correction or source question
Corrections and updates
Prepared October 2, 2026. Comparisons will be updated when a newly cleared source or verified event changes the record. Material corrections will identify what changed and when.