This is Deputy Cantrell’s body-camera footage from the moment he first arrives at the scene on March 8, 2024. Listen carefully to the order in which Deputy Esquivel tells the story, because it makes absolutely no sense.

Esquivel tells Cantrell that he followed the vehicle back to the property, that two white males approached him, that he pulled his gun on them, and then says he saw a rifle.

That sequence immediately jumped out at me.

According to Esquivel’s own first account, he pulled his firearm before he supposedly saw the rifle.

So what exactly caused him to draw his weapon?

At this point, Cantrell has just arrived. That matters because we are hearing Esquivel give one of his earliest versions of what supposedly happened, before the story had hours to evolve.

And this early version creates problems that only get worse later.

Esquivel describes two white males.

I am Algenonn Matlock. I am Black.

So his original description did not describe me.

Yet later that night, the operation shifts toward me, and the firearm story shifts with it.

Esquivel never stops Cantrell and says that the man he originally described as white obviously is not Algenonn Matlock.

Instead, the operation keeps moving forward.

There is another major contradiction.

Esquivel tells Cantrell that he followed the men onto my property and confronted them there.

But the body-camera timeline and surrounding evidence show that Esquivel remained away from my house at the Sand Creek and Pebble area and did not enter my yard or have the confrontation he later described.

And remember how this started.

Esquivel had been waiting down the road at the Country Store at Mistletoe and Sand Creek, where he is recorded saying he was waiting to “pick someone off.”

He then followed my vehicle toward my home.

He did not activate his emergency lights until we were nearly home.

He never activated a siren.

And the traffic violations he later described did not happen.

The only driving-related event was the horn being honked.

Then Cantrell arrives, and Esquivel gives him this story:

Two white guys approached me.

I pulled my gun.

Then I saw a rifle.

That order matters.

If the rifle was supposedly the danger that justified everything that followed, why does Esquivel’s own initial account have him drawing his firearm before he ever claims to see the rifle?

What was he supposedly responding to when he pulled his gun?

And the contradictions do not stop there.

Later, Cantrell’s body camera captures dispatch returning my identifying information at approximately 10:33 p.m.

Esquivel already had my correct identifying information before my wife, Vivian, was placed in the patrol vehicle.

Yet later he tells Cantrell that Vivian cannot be released because she supposedly will not provide her husband’s name.

That is me.

Algenonn Matlock.

The same man whose identifying information had already been obtained.

So within the same body-camera record, we have an original description of two white males.

We have me, a Black man, later becoming the target.

We have Esquivel drawing his firearm before the supposed rifle is even seen.

We have a claimed confrontation on my property that the body-camera timeline and surrounding evidence do not support.

We have my correct identifying information already being available.

And then we have a later claim that my wife was being detained because my identity supposedly had not been provided.

And after all of that, no rifle matching Esquivel’s story was recovered.

This is why the beginning of Cantrell’s body camera is so important.

It captures Esquivel telling another deputy his story almost immediately after the supposed encounter.

And instead of making Esquivel’s story stronger, his earliest recorded version is one of the pieces of evidence that starts tearing the entire thing apart.

Deputy Esquivel claims he drew his weapon story changes later