What a strange, vague article.

The only reason I could think of to get Peel involved was if the provenance of the damage was not immediately apparent and there was the possibility of deliberate action and the criminal consqeunces stemming from that act and any associated attempt to cover it up.

Sounds to me like the damage was so minor as to go unnoticed until the plane was towed to the hangar for the night and viewed by floodlight, at which point Peel was notified out of an abundance of caution and some reporter scanning the blotter picked up the report and ran with it.