How should complaints that demonstrate conflicting evidence be classified?

Complaints that demonstrate conflicting evidence should be classified as "not sustained" because this determination reflects situations where there is insufficient evidence to either prove or disprove the allegations made. When a complaint presents conflicting evidence, it indicates that there is no clear conclusion that can be drawn regarding the validity of the complaint. Therefore, it signifies that the investigation did not produce enough reliable or convincing evidence to fully support the claims or to absolve the officer involved. This classification is important as it allows for a comprehensive understanding of the nature of the complaint while acknowledging the complexities involved.

In contrast, "unfounded" would imply that the allegations were proven to be false, which doesn’t apply when there is conflicting evidence. "Exonerated" suggests that the officer was completely cleared of wrongdoing, which also cannot be concluded when evidence is conflicting. "Sustained" would indicate that the investigation found sufficient evidence to support the complaint, which contradicts the nature of conflicting evidence. Thus, "not sustained" is the appropriate classification in such scenarios.