#incidentlancey

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Subject Lancey Claire Graves, age approximately 20 to 25, represents one of the most significant domestic security threats currently active within the continental United States. Unlike typical cases processed through this department, Subject Graves exhibits no supernatural or anomalous abilities; her threat classification stems purely from her extraordinary capacity for violence, strategic planning and psychological manipulation combined with extensive military training and an apparent complete absence of empathy or moral constraints.

Subject first came to departmental attention following the December 29, 2015 incident in Ashwick Falls, Indiana, initially classified as a domestic homicide-suicide until forensic analysis revealed inconsistencies that elevated the case to federal oversight. The subsequent investigation uncovered evidence of premeditation, tactical expertise and behavioral patterns that deviated significantly from standard familicide profiles. Most concerning was the subject's complete disappearance from the crime scene despite extensive search operations and the apparent staged nature of the residential fire that consumed the primary evidence.

For authorized personnel only: [Open Character File] For further reports on The Graves Incident, consult the following archives:

1.1 Background and Early Life

1.2 Background and Early Life

2.1 Military Academy Years and Psychological Development

2.2 Military Academy Years and Psychological Development

2.3 Military Academy Years and Psychological Development

3.1 Return to Civilian Life and Final Family Dynamics

3.2 Return to Civilian Life and Final Family Dynamics

3.3 Return to Civilian Life and Final Family Dynamics

4.1 The Graves Incident and Aftermath

4.2 The Graves Incident and Aftermath

4.3 The Graves Incident and Aftermath

Post-Incident Investigation Current Threat Assessment

Additional fragments of Daniel’s diary can be found in the archives below:

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 & 2014 2015

📍 About Lancey’s friendships and trust (or lack thereof) 

Here's the thing about Lancey: she doesn't really do friendship in the traditional sense. Trust is a currency she spends very, very carefully; even then, it's more like... operational trust? She trusts people to do their jobs, to have her back in the field, to be competent; but trusting someone with actual emotional vulnerability? That's a completely different level she barely accesses.

IF she were to be introduced in what we know as the creepypasta word, I feel like the “Proxy Team” is where most of her meaningful connections exist, mainly because they're forced into close quarters constantly and have literally kept each other alive:

Masky/Tim is confusing as HELL. So in my version, Masky and Tim are like two distinct personalities or modes that share the same body (same with Hoodie)? Masky is what we know as the proxy: cold, tactical, mission-focused, shaped by the Operator's influence. Tim is what's left of the original person: more human, more emotional, trying to hold onto normalcy. They're both aware of each other but want different things entirely.

With Masky specifically, Lancey would trust him in combat more than anyone. They'd move with this scary synchronization during missions, the kind that only comes from both being hyper-competent and deeply controlled. He'd get what it means to be a weapon and she'd respect that. When it's Masky, things would make sense: it's professional and efficient. There'd be sharp banter between them, both of them sharing this certain dry humor, but also this platonic understanding where they respect each other.

With Tim though? That's where it gets messy. Tim treats her like a person; asks if she's okay, shows genuine concern, wants actual connection. And that makes her uncomfortable because it requires vulnerability she doesn't want to access. She knows how to work with Masky. Tim makes her feel something she's not ready to name. It's not that she dislikes him, really; there's a weird comfort in his presence she won't acknowledge, but it's complicated in ways that combat never is.

Hoodie/Brian gets a quiet kind of respect from her. He doesn't push, doesn't demand emotional labor, just exists as this steady presence. She trusts him to read situations correctly and not do anything stupid. I can imagine them sitting in silence for hours and just being comfortable.

With Kate the Chaser (I absolutely adore this character! Creepypasta women have my HEARRRT) they have this weird competitive respect thing going on. You can imagine, two women in a male-dominated proxy team who push each other to be better, faster and deadlier. They don't talk about feelings, but they understand each other. It's the kind of relationship built on mutual "hey, I see you and I respect what you're capable of" vibes.

Ticci Toby drives her absolutely insane. He's chaos incarnate, aggressive, reckless, unpredictable and everything she can't stand in a person. She tolerates him because they're stuck on the same team... but that's tactical necessity, not affection. She's not protective of him; she just refuses to let incompetence get people killed on her watch.

IMPORTANT one here, with The Operator, it's different from most proxies. Lancey doesn't just comply out of fear or resignation; she willingly follows Him. She respects the Operator in the way you respect an apex predator or a force of nature: with complete awareness of what He is and what He's capable of. She performs her role with precision and efficiency not just because it's survival, but because she genuinely believes in the hierarchy and her place within it. 

Since you asked specifically about Nina, well, I have to be HONEST and admit I never thought about it, but I feel like Lancey would keep her at arm's length. I imagine Nina being loud, impulsive, borderline, overly emotional about everything and with zero concept of personal boundaries; basically everything that grates against Lancey's need for control and order. That being said, Lancey would have a begrudging respect for Nina's complete lack of fear. Now, Lancey wouldn't trust Nina with anything serious, but she wouldn't underestimate her either.

📍 About Lancey and Daniel

… Okay, so here's where it gets complicated.

As you guys know so far, Daniel was Lancey's younger brother and, objectively speaking, he was probably the closest thing to an anchor she had before everything went to hell. They were inseparable growing up: best friends, partners in crime, the kind of sibling bond that looked unbreakable from the outside. But here's the thing people need to understand about Lancey: she's ALWAYS had psychopathic traits. So when I say Daniel was her "anchor," I don't mean in some romantic, feelings-filled way. I mean he was a tactical anchor; the one person whose existence kept her tethered to appearing normal, to maintaining the facade of being human.

The night she killed her family, Daniel was the last one. And here's what's interesting: his death wasn't part of the original plan the same way her parents' were. There's something about that last-minute decision I can't fully get into YET 👀 But let's just say Lancey made a calculated choice in those final moments.

Because here's the thing: when she killed Daniel, she killed the only thing that could've kept her human. He was her vulnerability, her "flaw," the one crack in her armor that could've been exploited or could've pulled her back from the edge. And she chose to eliminate that. Whether it was because she thought she had to, or because she couldn't risk the weakness, or because of something else entirely... well. That's complicated and up to you.

Does she actually feel something about Daniel's death? Eh. I'm not going to tell you. Lancey doesn't regret what she did. Regret requires emotional capacity she simply doesn't have. But again, that's for the reader to interpret.

Maybe it's the closest thing to grief a psychopath can experience. Maybe it's just compulsion. Maybe it's something else entirely. The beauty of Lancey is that even she might not fully understand why she does it, and she's certainly not interested in examining it closely enough to find out. What I will say is this: Daniel's death represents the moment Lancey fully committed to what she is. No going back and no redemption arc. She killed the one thing that could've kept her human, and she did it on purpose.

No physical evidence of Lancey herself was discovered at the scene, despite extensive searching of the surrounding area by both local law enforcement and federal investigators. Her complete disappearance from the scene, combined with the sophisticated nature of the evidence destruction, indicates planning and preparation that extended far beyond the immediate acts of violence.

Vehicle analysis revealed that the family's cars remained in the driveway and showed no signs of recent use. However, Detective Graves' personal pickup truck was missing from the scene and electronic toll records indicate this vehicle was used to travel eastbound on Interstate 80 at 5:17 AM, approximately six hours after the first murder and ninety minutes after the fire was reported.

The truck was discovered three days later in a long-term parking facility at Chicago O'Hare International Airport, wiped clean of fingerprints and other forensic evidence. Security camera footage from the airport parking facility was inconclusive due to deliberate avoidance of camera angles by the individual who parked the vehicle.

Daniel Marcus Graves was killed last, at approximately 12:23 AM, in his bedroom where he had apparently been sleeping. Unlike the violent methods used on his parents, Daniel's death was accomplished through asphyxiation using his own pillows and bedding. Toxicology analysis revealed the presence of diphenhydramine in his bloodstream at levels consistent with sedation, suggesting he had been drugged prior to the asphyxiation.

The absence of defensive wounds and the careful positioning of his body suggest that Daniel was unconscious when the asphyxiation began. His body was found covered with his favorite childhood blanket, a Star Wars themed comforter he had owned since elementary school, arranged in a peaceful sleeping position that contrasted sharply with the violence inflicted on his parents.

Most significantly, forensic analysis of the house revealed evidence of extensive post-mortem activity. Blood evidence, fingerprints and other forensic markers had been systematically cleaned or obscured, indicating that Lancey spent considerable time in the residence after completing the murder. The cleanup was so thorough that investigators initially believed Lancey had been murdered alongside her family members, with her body completely destroyed by the intensity of the fire.

Personal items belonging to Daniel were removed from the scene. His computer hard drive was wiped using military-grade data destruction techniques and his cell phone was completely destroyed. The selectivity of the items removed, focusing on materials that documented his relationship with Lancey, suggests that these thefts were motivated by emotional significance rather than purely practical considerations.

Academy officials concluded that the incident was an unfortunate accident resulting from the challenging terrain and low-visibility conditions. However, several factors suggest this conclusion may have been premature, including the severity of Miller's injuries relative to the supposed cause and inconsistencies in witness statements about team positions during the exercise.

Most significantly, Lancey's performance evaluation following this incident noted her “exceptional leadership under pressure” and “quick thinking in emergency situations,” suggesting that her role in Miller's rescue enhanced rather than damaged her standing with academy administration.

Letters to Daniel during this period show particular calculation in their emotional content. Each letter appears designed to maintain his devotion while providing Lancey with detailed intelligence about the family's emotional dynamics during her absence. She consistently encouraged Daniel to share personal information about his school experiences, friendships and emotional struggles while providing carefully crafted responses that reinforced his dependency on her guidance and approval.

One particularly revealing letter to Daniel, dated March 15, 2014, demonstrates the tactical nature of their correspondence: “I'm so proud of how you handled the situation with Jimmy. It sounds like you used exactly the approach we discussed. Identifying what he was really insecure about and then making him feel like you understood his problems better than he did. The fact that he's now defending you against the other kids shows that you successfully changed his role from bully to ally. Remember, people will do almost anything for someone who makes them feel understood and important, even if that understanding is just strategic.”

This letter, written when Daniel was only 15 years old, reveals Lancey teaching her younger brother sophisticated manipulation techniques while framing them as normal social skills. The casual tone and sisterly pride in the letter mask what amounts to instruction in psychological manipulation of peers.

As previously mentioned, letters to her parents during this period show equally calculated emotional management but with different strategic objectives. Correspondence with Detective Graves focused on military achievement and character development, consistently reinforcing his belief that the academy was developing Lancey into an ideal military officer. Letters to Ellen Graves emphasized family love and emotional connection while providing detailed reassurances about Lancey's moral development and personal values.

Perhaps most disturbing were letters in which Lancey demonstrated awareness that her family relationships required ongoing maintenance and strategic attention. In one letter to Ellen Graves, dated November 20, 2013, she wrote: “I've been thinking a lot about how important it is to maintain strong family connections even when we're separated by distance and different life experiences. I know that some families grow apart when children leave home for extended periods, but I'm determined to make sure that never happens to us. I've been making sure to write to Daniel regularly and to really listen to what's going on in his life so that our relationship stays strong. I want him to always feel comfortable coming to me with his problems and knowing that I'll be there to help him figure things out.”

While this sentiment appears loving and mature on its surface, the clinical language and strategic framing reveal Lancey's calculated approach to maintaining family relationships. The letter reads less like an expression of natural familial love and more like a status report on relationship management objectives.

Academy graduation records show that Lancey completed her program with the highest academic and military honors, earning recognition as the outstanding cadet in her graduating class. Her final evaluation, written by Colonel Morrison, praised her leadership capabilities, tactical expertise and personal character while noting certain reservations that take on prophetic significance in light of subsequent events: “Cadet Graves represents the best of what military education can produce: exceptional intellectual capability, superior tactical skills and natural leadership ability. However, I would recommend that her career development include ongoing mentorship focused on the ethical application of her considerable talents. While her moral reasoning is sophisticated and her expressed values are consistent with military ideals, there is something in her approach to leadership and problem-solving that suggests she might benefit from guidance in situations where tactical efficiency conflicts with humanitarian concerns.”

Colonel Morrison's concerns were initially dismissed by other faculty members who viewed Lancey's emotional control as evidence of exceptional military bearing. Her academic transcripts from Morrison Academy show perfect or near-perfect scores in all subjects, with particular excellence in courses focused on psychological warfare, strategic planning and weapons training. More troubling, when viewed retrospectively, were her outstanding marks in courses dealing with interrogation techniques and the psychological manipulation of enemy combatants.

Master Sergeant Patricia Williams, who served as Lancey's primary firearms instructor, provided particularly revealing insights into the subject's approach to weapons training: “Most cadets, when they first handle firearms, show some combination of excitement, nervousness or healthy respect for the weapon's destructive potential. Lancey's reaction was different. She approached each weapon like it was a tool she was meant to master, with no emotional response whatsoever. Within weeks, she was outperforming cadets who had been training for years. But what struck me most was her interest in the theoretical applications of different weapons and ammunition types. She would ask detailed questions about stopping power, penetration capabilities and the specific physiological effects of different wound patterns. These were legitimate technical questions, I know... but the way she asked them, with genuine curiosity and no apparent discomfort, was unusual even for a military environment.”

Despite these concerns from individual instructors, Lancey's overall academy experience was marked by consistent praise and recognition. She was elected to student leadership positions by her peers, maintained friendships across different social groups and was universally regarded as one of the academy's most promising students.

Cadet María Santos, Lancey's roommate for two years and self-described "best friend" during their time at Morrison, provided extensive testimony that inadvertently reveals the sophisticated nature of Lancey's social manipulation: “Lancey was incredible. She was the kind of friend everyone wants. She remembered everything you told her, she always knew exactly what to say when you were upset and she had this way of making you feel like you were the most important person in the world when she was talking to you. She helped me through my parents' divorce, my struggles with the physical training requirements and about a million other crises. I honestly don't know how I would have survived Morrison without her!”

However, when pressed for specific details about their friendship, Santos revealed troubling patterns: “The weird thing was that I realized, after we graduated, that I knew almost nothing about Lancey's inner life. Like, I had told her everything about my family, my fears, my dreams, my insecurities and she had been so supportive and understanding about all of it. But when I tried to think about what she had shared with me about her own emotional world, there was almost nothing. She would tell stories about her family, especially her little brother, but they were always these perfectly crafted anecdotes that made her seem like the ideal daughter and sister. She never had breakdowns, never seemed genuinely afraid or uncertain about anything, never needed the kind of emotional support that she was constantly providing to everyone else.”

Santos continued: "I remember one night during our junior year when I was having a panic attack about an upcoming exam. Lancey sat with me for hours, using these breathing techniques and talking me through my anxiety in ways that were incredibly effective. She knew exactly what to say and do to calm me down. But the whole time, she had this look in her eyes like she was observing my reaction to her methods rather than actually caring about my distress. It sounds horrible to say that about someone who helped me so much, but looking back, it felt like I was being studied rather than comforted."

This pattern of providing exceptional emotional support while remaining fundamentally detached was consistent across multiple interviews with Lancey's academy peers. She was universally remembered as generous with her time and attention, always available to help with academic difficulties or personal problems and possessed of an almost supernatural ability to understand what people needed to hear. However, multiple sources noted that these interactions felt subtly one-sided, with Lancey never reciprocating by sharing her own vulnerabilities.

The romantic relationships Lancey maintained during her academy years provide particularly revealing insights into her developing psychological profile. Cadet Olivia Thompson, who dated Lancey for approximately eight months during their senior year, described their relationship in terms that echo the accounts of her middle school partners but with more sophisticated manipulation techniques.

“Dating Lancey was like being the center of the universe,” Thompson stated during her interview. “She made me feel like I was the most interesting, attractive, important person who had ever lived. She would remember tiny details about things I had mentioned weeks earlier and would surprise me with gestures or conversations that proved she had been thinking about me. The physical relationship was incredible. She seemed to know exactly what I wanted before I knew it myself. But over time, I started to feel like I was in a relationship with someone who was playing a character rather than being herself.”

The pattern of behavior described by Torres was consistent across multiple interviews with Lancey's former romantic partners from her middle and early high school years. Each relationship followed a similar trajectory: intense initial connection based on Lancey's apparent perfect understanding of her partner's emotional needs followed by growing unease as the partners recognized the calculated nature of her responses and her apparent inability to reciprocate genuine emotional vulnerability.

Perhaps most telling was the consistent observation that Lancey never initiated emotional intimacy or support-seeking behavior in any of her relationships. While she was described as physically affectionate and sexually confident beyond her years, multiple former partners noted that she never shared personal fears, insecurities or moments of genuine emotional need. This created relationships that were intensely satisfying for her partners in the short term but ultimately felt hollow and one-sided.

The one significant exception to this pattern was her relationship with her brother Daniel, which remained consistently central to her life throughout her adolescence. However, even this relationship, when examined through the lens of subsequent events, reveals troubling dynamics that suggest Daniel's role was less that of a beloved sibling and more that of an emotional laboratory where Lancey could observe and experiment with human attachment in its most pure form.

Daniel's childhood diary, recovered from the ruins of the Graves family home and partially reconstructed by forensic specialists, provides the most intimate and disturbing glimpse into Lancey's developing psychology during her formative years. The entries, written by a child who clearly adored his sister without reservation, inadvertently document behavior patterns that suggest Lancey was using their relationship to study human emotion and attachment while remaining fundamentally incapable of reciprocating these feelings authentically.

The decision to enroll Lancey in Morrison Military Academy at age 15 was reportedly made by Detective Graves following extensive consultation with school counselors and military contacts. According to interviews with family friends, Detective Graves believed that military structure and discipline would provide Lancey with appropriate channels for her obvious intelligence and leadership capabilities while preparing her for a stable career path. The choice was also influenced by Lancey's own expressed interest in military service, though her motivations for this interest become questionable now.

Ellen Graves was reportedly more reluctant about the decision, primarily due to her concerns about separating Lancey from Daniel during such formative years. However, she ultimately supported her husband's decision based on their shared belief that civilian high school might not provide sufficient intellectual challenge for their daughter's exceptional academic abilities.

The separation had profound effects on both siblings, though these manifested in dramatically different ways. Daniel's response to Lancey's departure for military school was consistent with typical sibling attachment: periods of sadness, frequent letters and obvious excitement during her visits home. Lancey's response, however, suggests that the separation served as a form of field testing for emotional manipulation techniques she had been developing throughout her childhood.

Letters from Lancey to Daniel during her military school years, recovered during the investigation, reveal a sophisticated understanding of emotional manipulation that appears to have been designed to maintain Daniel's devotion while providing her with opportunities to experiment with long-distance psychological control. These letters consistently demonstrated perfect pitch in terms of emotional tone, providing exactly the right balance of affection, humor and shared memories to maintain Daniel's attachment while never revealing genuine vulnerability or emotional need on Lancey's part.

More disturbing were letters from Lancey to her parents during this same period, which revealed dramatically different communication strategies tailored to each recipient's specific psychological profile. Letters to Detective Graves emphasized military discipline, academic achievement and leadership development, consistently reinforcing his belief that the military school decision had been correct. Letters to Ellen Graves focused on emotional reassurance, expressions of love and appreciation for the family and requests for specific details about home life that maintained her connection to the family unit.