The Clean Exit
When a crime scene cleaner finds a body before the job even starts, she knows something’s gone wrong
Cleo Vance didn’t mind blood. Not anymore. After ten years of scrubbing crime scenes for a living, the shock had worn off. The way people stared when she showed up in her van marked “Hazmat Response Solutions” still amused her. They didn’t know the real work she did.
They didn’t know that, on some nights, Cleo helped criminals disappear.
Her second job was less official. She was the planner behind clean getaways. High-end burglars, quiet crews, and smooth operators hired her to handle exit logistics. She mapped escape routes, scouted safe houses, and scheduled everything down to the second. She didn’t ask questions about the jobs. That was the rule. She cleaned, she planned, she walked away.
But tonight wasn’t going according to plan.
The house was supposed to be empty. Just a stop on her prep list. A sleek glass-and-steel modern place in the Hollywood Hills, remote enough for a quick drop-in, quick drop-out kind of job. The crew was set to hit the house in two nights. Cleo came early to check entrances, study the layout, and stash some gear in the crawlspace.
The alarm was disabled. That was standard.
What wasn’t standard was the man in the living room.
He was dead. Very dead. Face down on the white marble floor, blood pooled under him like spilled wine. Cleo stopped just inside the door and stared. The body wasn’t part of the plan. No one was supposed to be here. Especially not someone with a bullet in the back of his skull.
Her first thought was: did someone beat the crew to it?
Her second: am I being set up?
She backed out slowly, careful not to touch anything. She’d seen enough scenes to know when things were fresh. This one was. Less than an hour, maybe less. The blood hadn’t started to dry. That meant whoever did it might still be nearby.
Cleo climbed into her van and locked the doors. She didn’t drive off yet. She needed to think.
She pulled out her burner phone and dialed a number she hadn’t used in months.
“Yeah?” a voice answered.
“It’s Vance,” she said. “I’ve got a problem.”
A pause. “What kind?”
“The dead kind.”
Another pause. “Talk.”
She explained what she saw. Left out a few details. Cleo didn’t trust anyone completely, especially not Marcus. He was the middleman, the guy who connected her with the crew set to rob the house. If anyone could've sold her out, it was him.
Marcus cursed. “That wasn’t part of the job. That house was clean. No one lives there full time.”
“Someone does now,” Cleo said.
“Leave it alone,” he told her. “Walk away. I’ll handle it.”
That was not what she wanted to hear.
“Walk away?” she asked. “You don’t think this has something to do with the job?”
He didn’t answer.
“Marcus,” she said, “did you double-book this house?”
He exhaled. “There was interest from another crew. I said no. But maybe they didn’t like that answer.”
So that was it. Someone else wanted the target. Maybe they showed up early to take it by force. Maybe the guy on the floor was part of that crew. Or maybe he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Cleo felt her stomach turn. This wasn’t just a heist anymore. It was a mess. And messes were dangerous.
“I’m out,” she said. “Tell your crew to find another planner.”
“Cleo—”
“I don’t walk into houses with fresh bodies on the floor. That’s not my job.”
She hung up.
The problem was, walking away wasn’t so easy. She’d already stashed equipment on-site: tools, gloves, burner phones, fake plates. If the cops found any of it, they’d trace it back to her. She had to go back. Clean up her own mess. Literally.
So she waited an hour. Drove back in through the canyon once the roads were quiet. Parked a block away. Entered through the back, gloves on, mask in place.
She removed everything she’d left behind. Wiped down the crawlspace. Took nothing that didn’t belong to her.
Then, she stood over the body again. She didn’t know the man, but he felt familiar somehow. Something about his watch. The ring on his finger. A memory clicked.
She had seen him before. A photo. On Marcus’s phone.
He wasn’t just anyone. He was a client.
Marcus hadn’t just double-booked the job. He’d set up a hit.
That changed everything.
Cleo looked around the room, scanned the corners, then checked the ceiling. No cameras. No obvious bugs.
She took one last look at the body, then left through the garage.
By the time she got home, she’d made up her mind. This wasn’t just about walking away. Someone tried to burn her. She couldn’t let that slide.
She opened her laptop, pulled up encrypted files, and started digging. Every crew Marcus had worked with. Every job she’d helped him plan. She’d find the connection. She’d find who pulled the trigger.
Because Cleo Vance wasn’t just a cleaner.
She was also very good at taking out the trash.
About the Creator
Solene Hart
Hi, I’m Solene Hart — a content writer and storyteller. I share honest thoughts, emotional fiction, and quiet truths. If it lingers, I’ve done my job. 🖤
Keep reading
More stories from Solene Hart and writers in Criminal and other communities.
Black Market Beauty
Dr. Evelyn Hart had always believed in the power of transformation. As one of Los Angeles’s most sought-after cosmetic surgeons, she helped people reshape their lives, one procedure at a time. Her clinic, Hart Aesthetics, was a modern sanctuary—white walls, soft lighting, and the subtle scent of eucalyptus in the air. To her patients, it was a place of hope and renewal. To Evelyn, it was everything she’d worked for.
By Solene Hart5 months ago in Criminal
Losing Sweet Holly
Holly Cantrell was a mother of two boys and a wife to an ill husband. Holly was a Physical Therapist Technician at the McAlester Regional Health Center. She was a Bouncy Brunette with a fun sense of Humor. Holly made friends easily and often had lunch with friends at work. Friends, to have a charming Physical therapist while they are pushing and pulling on the sore parts, is such a good thing. But things were noticeably different one cold Friday Morning in January.
By Cassie Moore5 days ago in Criminal
Minneapolis ICE Shooting Updates
In recent weeks, Minneapolis has found itself at the center of a growing legal and political controversy following a shooting involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. What initially appeared to be a straightforward federal use-of-force investigation has evolved into a broader dispute between state authorities and federal officials, raising serious questions about transparency, jurisdiction, and accountability. The most significant development so far is the state’s claim that it has been denied access to key evidence related to the incident. As public attention intensifies, the case is no longer just about what happened during the shooting. It is increasingly about who controls the facts, who gets to investigate them, and how justice is supposed to function when federal and state systems collide. What We Know About the Minneapolis ICE Shooting The shooting occurred during a federal immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis. ICE agents were reportedly conducting official duties when gunfire erupted, resulting in injuries and immediate emergency response. Federal authorities confirmed the incident and stated that internal protocols were activated, including an automatic review by federal oversight bodies. From the beginning, details were limited. Officials cited the ongoing nature of the investigation and concerns about officer safety. This lack of information, while not unusual in federal cases, quickly became a point of friction for Minnesota state authorities, who argued that the public deserved clarity and that the state had a legal role to play in examining the incident. State Authorities Push for Transparency Minnesota state officials, including investigators and legal representatives, formally requested access to evidence connected to the shooting. This evidence reportedly includes body camera footage, surveillance recordings, forensic reports, and internal communication logs from the operation. According to state representatives, these requests were either delayed or denied outright. The state has since gone on record stating that it cannot independently assess the legality of the shooting without full access to the materials. This denial has fueled concerns that federal agencies are operating without sufficient external oversight, especially in incidents involving potential civilian harm. State leaders emphasized that their position is not adversarial by default. Rather, they argue that cooperation between federal and state agencies is essential to maintain public trust, particularly in communities already wary of immigration enforcement. Federal Response and Jurisdictional Limits Federal officials, for their part, maintain that the investigation falls squarely under federal jurisdiction. ICE operates as a federal agency, and shootings involving federal officers are typically reviewed internally and, when appropriate, by federal prosecutors or inspectors general. In statements released following the controversy, federal representatives cited legal restrictions that limit the sharing of evidence during an active investigation. They also stressed that premature disclosure could compromise witness testimony or investigative integrity. This explanation, while legally grounded, has done little to ease state frustrations. Critics argue that “ongoing investigation” has too often been used as a blanket justification for withholding information, even in cases where transparency could prevent misinformation and public unrest. Community Reaction and Public Trust The Minneapolis community has responded with a mix of concern, anger, and fatigue. For many residents, particularly in immigrant and marginalized communities, the shooting has reopened long-standing fears about aggressive enforcement tactics and lack of accountability. Community leaders and advocacy groups have called for the immediate release of non-sensitive evidence, arguing that transparency is a prerequisite for trust. Peaceful demonstrations and public forums have highlighted a broader demand: that no law enforcement agency, federal or otherwise, should be beyond scrutiny. Local officials echoed these concerns, noting that Minneapolis has spent years attempting to rebuild trust between residents and law enforcement. The perception that evidence is being withheld threatens to undermine that progress. Legal Implications of Denied Evidence From a legal standpoint, the state’s inability to access evidence raises complex questions. While federal agencies do have authority over their operations, states also have a responsibility to investigate deaths or injuries occurring within their borders. Legal experts suggest that this dispute could set a precedent. If states are routinely blocked from reviewing evidence in federal use-of-force cases, it may limit their ability to pursue independent inquiries or bring charges under state law when applicable. Some analysts believe the issue could ultimately be resolved in court, with judges determining whether the state has a legal right to access certain materials. Such a ruling could have national implications, influencing how future federal-state conflicts are handled. Political Dimensions of the Case The Minneapolis ICE shooting has also taken on a political dimension. Immigration enforcement remains a deeply divisive issue, and incidents like this tend to amplify existing ideological divides. State officials critical of federal immigration policies view the denial of evidence as symptomatic of a larger lack of accountability. Meanwhile, supporters of strict federal enforcement argue that state interference could hinder effective operations and put officers at risk. This political tension complicates the path forward. What might otherwise be a procedural disagreement risks becoming a symbolic battle over immigration, law enforcement authority, and states’ rights. What Happens Next? As of now, the investigation continues under federal oversight, while the state explores its legal options. Negotiations between state and federal officials have reportedly not been ruled out, suggesting that a compromise could still be reached. Potential next steps include limited evidence sharing under confidentiality agreements, congressional inquiries, or judicial review. Each option carries its own risks and consequences, both legally and politically. What remains clear is that public pressure is unlikely to fade. Minneapolis residents, like many Americans, are demanding clarity, fairness, and accountability in cases involving law enforcement use of force. A Broader Conversation About Accountability The Minneapolis ICE shooting is no longer just a single incident under investigation. It has become a lens through which broader issues are being examined: the balance of power between federal and state authorities, the limits of transparency, and the role of public oversight in a democratic society. Whether or not the state ultimately gains access to the evidence, the controversy has already sparked an important conversation. How that conversation translates into policy, practice, or reform remains to be seen, but its impact will likely extend far beyond Minneapolis. In the end, accountability is not only about assigning blame. It is about ensuring that systems function openly and fairly, especially when lives are affected. The outcome of this case may help determine how well those principles are upheld in the future.
By Saboor Brohi 3 days ago in Criminal
Violence Begets
"Any last words, cowboy?" "None you'd understand, sodbuster." "Funny. That's Marshall Sodbuster to you. But I meant some last nugget that would help us in the adjudication of the myriad offenses counted against you and your gang. I wasn't asking for penitence."
By Adam Diehl4 days ago in Fiction
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.