This public technical brief analyzes two analytically distinct but structurally similar institutional failure modes using a control-systems and systems-engineering framework. First, the document compiles documented discrepancies reported by independent investigators regarding materials the U.S. Department of Justice was required to release under the Epstein Files Transparency Act of 2025. Second, it surveys four long-standing experimental tensions within the Standard Model of particle physics that remain under active investigation. The central thesis is structural rather than political: when institutional outputs diverge persistently from stated optimization targets, the resulting incoherence represents a measurable systems-level risk. The brief therefore frames transparency, auditability, and external verification as engineering stability requirements rather than normative policy preferences. Key technical elements include: - documented-discrepancy evidence posture for public-record verification- control-theoretic interpretation of institutional drift- status review of proton radius, neutron lifetime, short-baseline neutrino, and semileptonic B-decay anomalies- concrete verification and escalation protocol for independent review- evidence comparison matrix with confidence gradation The document is written for engineers, oversight bodies, investigative journalists, and physics researchers concerned with observability, auditability, and long-horizon system stability. It relies exclusively on official government statements, peer-reviewed literature, and on-record reporting. This release is provided as a public-domain technical brief to support independent verification and cross-institutional review. Primary file: Coherence_Is_King.pdf