Identifying the suspect in a graffiti incident matters when reporting as a sanitation worker.

Outline

• Set the scene: graffiti incident on a sanitation route and the quick, clear reporting that helps the team.

• Answer up front: the key report should say that Mrs. Stanley identified one boy as Randy McGill.

• Why that detail matters: identification helps authorities, clarifies responsibility, and moves things forward.

• Why the other options are less useful in this context.

• How to report this info well: what to include, who to tell, and how to document.

• Quick checklist for clear reporting.

• A closing thought: every precise report is a neighborhoods’ small act of safety and accountability.

What to report—and why the key detail matters

Let me put it plainly: when graffiti shows up along a sanitation route, the most useful report often centers on the people involved. In this particular scenario, the crucial line to include is this: Mrs. Stanley identified one boy as Randy McGill. That single identification creates a direct link back to the act of vandalism, which is exactly the kind of precise detail authorities and property owners rely on to move things along.

You might wonder, “But what about two boys spraying graffiti, or a lone witness?” Those details can be informative too, but they don’t tie the incident to a specific person as cleanly as an identified suspect. When you’re writing a report on the go, you want to capture the breakpoint—who did it, who witnessed it, and what exactly happened. In this case, the named identification matters because it anchors the incident to a real individual. It’s not about accusing someone on the spot; it’s about giving the right information to the authorities so they can investigate responsibly and follow proper steps.

Why the other options don’t carry the same weight in this situation

• A. Two boys were caught spraying graffiti.

That tells you something happened and there were two involved, but it doesn’t point to a specific person. Without a named subject, it’s harder for investigators to verify and follow up quickly.

• B. Only Mrs. Stanley witnessed the event.

A witness speaks up, which is valuable, but the info becomes actionable only if you also capture who the witness saw. Knowing that there was a single witness is less helpful than pairing a witness with a named individual tied to the act.

• D. My truck has been vandalized.

That’s serious, no doubt, but it’s not the graffiti act itself unless the two incidents are connected. If the truck damage is a separate event, it should be reported separately with its own details. Mixing unrelated damage can muddy the focus of the report.

How to report this clearly, in the real world

Now, let’s translate that key fact into a report-ready paragraph and a simple process you can follow on the ground. When you’re out on the route, you’re collecting pieces of a larger puzzle. Your job is to assemble them into a clear, verifiable picture.

What to include in the report

• The core fact: that Mrs. Stanley identified one boy as Randy McGill. Use neutral, non-accusatory language. For example: “Mrs. Stanley identified a single male, Randy McGill, as a participant in the graffiti incident observed on [location], at [time].”

• Time and location: the exact street name, cross streets, and approximate time. This helps responders locate the scene and review any nearby surveillance if available.

• Description of the incident: what was sprayed, where on the property, and any immediate consequences you observed (e.g., damage to surfaces, color or type of graffiti, tools used if visible).

• Witness statements: note what Mrs. Stanley said and whether she provided contact information or a description of the boy. Record her statement verbatim if possible, or summarize accurately.

• Involved parties: name Randy McGill as identified, but also capture the witness’s relationship to the scene (a neighbor, passerby, resident) and any other people present.

• Evidence and documentation: photos of the graffiti, debris, vehicles, or the area; any video footage from nearby cameras; time-stamped notes; and the incident number you’re given.

• Property impact: if there’s a vehicle or building damage connected to the graffiti scene, document it separately but clearly note whether it’s connected to the same incident.

• Follow-up steps: who you reported to (your supervisor, the property owner, the police), any ticket numbers or incident numbers, and what’s expected next (inspection, cleanup, or investigation).

How the reporting flow typically works

• Report to your supervisor first. They’ll guide how to escalate to the right authorities and whether to file an internal incident report.

• If police involvement is needed (which is common with vandalism), provide the details you’ve gathered, including the named individual, timing, location, and any evidence. Cooperate with officers as needed, but keep your own notes precise and calm.

• Coordinate with property owners or managers about the scene, the cleanup plan, and any required permissions for restoration.

• Preserve evidence: don’t wash or move things around if they might be evidence. If you’ve photographed the scene, back those files up and note the time and device used.

• Follow up on the case: check back with your supervisor or the assigned contact for updates, and keep the lines of communication open with the property owner.

A quick, practical reporting checklist

• Time, date, and exact location of the graffiti incident

• Mrs. Stanley’s identification: one boy, Randy McGill

• Description of the graffiti (words, colors, size, location on the surface)

• How many witnesses, and what each witness said

• Photos or video evidence, with dates/times

• Any related property damage (e.g., to a nearby truck) and whether it’s connected

• Your own observations about how the incident happened (safe distance, non-confrontational approach)

• Names and contact information for witnesses or witnesses’ guardians (if appropriate and safe)

• Incident number or report number from your supervisor or authorities

• Next steps: cleanup plan, follow-up inspection, and any additional reporting required

Keeping the reporting frame human and precise

We’re not playing courtroom drama here; we’re keeping it practical. A good report reads like a clear map: careful, honest, and straight to the point. For sanitation workers, the day-to-day work of cleaning streets and maintaining public spaces is part of a bigger mission—keeping neighborhoods safe and clean. When you report a graffiti incident, you’re doing your part to make sure the responsible party—when identified—faced the consequences, and the area can be restored quickly.

A couple of quick notes on accuracy and fairness

• Misidentification can happen. If Mrs. Stanley identifies a person, you still want to corroborate with other information whenever possible (additional witnesses, video, or a description that matches more than one person). It’s better to be precise and cautious than to rush to conclusions.

• Keep the language neutral. Avoid attaching motives or character judgments. Focus on the action and the person’s identification as stated by a witness, as well as the observable facts.

• Prioritize safety. If you’re ever unsure about approaching someone directly, step back and report to your supervisor or authorities. Your safety comes first, and good reporting respects that.

A small, uplifting thought to end on

Every time a sanitation worker brings a well-documented report to light, it’s more than a line on a form. It’s a step toward accountability, a cleaner curb, and a safer block for neighbors who walk past every day. The graffiti may be a disruption, but your responsible reporting helps turn disruption into a constructive response. And when that response lands, you’ll likely see the same street return to its ordinary rhythm—quiet, clean, and just a little bit prouder for the care that went into protecting it.

Final takeaway

In this scenario, the most actionable detail to report is that Mrs. Stanley identified one boy as Randy McGill. That single, specific piece of information ties the act to a person, enabling follow-up actions that can lead to resolution and accountability. The rest—time, location, witness statements, and evidence—supports that thread, creating a clear, useful picture for supervisors, authorities, and property owners alike. And with that clarity, a community’s streets can recover a little faster, one well-documented report at a time.