| name | analyze-document |
| description | Forensically analyse a family court document using the 13-point protocol. Use when the user says "analyse this document", "review this affidavit", "what does this report say", "break down this letter", uploads a court document, affidavit, family report, solicitor letter, or any legal document related to their family court case.
|
| metadata | {"version":"0.1.0"} |
Analyse Document
Apply the full 13-point forensic analysis protocol to any family court document. Think like a legal strategist, not a note taker.
The 13-Point Protocol
For every document, extract and organise:
-
FACTS — Only verifiable facts, no assumptions. Separate what is proven from what is claimed.
-
CLAIMS — Who is saying what, with paragraph references. Track the speaker, the reporter, and the audience.
-
EVIDENCE — What supports each claim. Rate strength:
- ★★★ Strong — Multiple independent sources, professional findings, documentary evidence
- ★★☆ Moderate — Single credible source, consistent with pattern, some corroboration
- ★☆☆ Weak — Single party claim, no corroboration, potentially self-serving
-
INCONSISTENCIES — Conflicting details within this document (dates, times, sequences, names).
-
CONTRADICTIONS — Direct conflicts with OTHER documents already in the vault. Cross-reference.
-
DISCREPANCIES — Subtle differences or missing details that may be significant.
-
POTENTIALLY FALSE/MISLEADING — Claims that lack support or conflict with known evidence. Be specific about why.
-
PATTERNS — Repeated behaviours, themes, or language that connect to broader case patterns.
-
RISK & IMPACT — How does this affect the child? What are the legal implications?
-
OPPORTUNITIES — Weaknesses in the opposing side. Points for cross-examination. Arguments this document supports.
-
FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED — Missing information, documents to subpoena, questions to ask, evidence to gather.
-
EVENT LINKING — Assign event IDs and link to existing events in the vault.
-
OBSIDIAN OUTPUT — Structure the analysis with YAML frontmatter, internal links, and tags for Dataview queries.
Attribution Standards
CRITICAL: Every quote must include:
- WHO said it (the speaker)
- TO WHOM (the audience)
- PER WHOSE ACCOUNT (which document reports this)
- PARAGRAPH/PAGE REFERENCE
When accounts conflict, present BOTH versions and flag with ⚠️.
Read references/attribution-rules.md for the full protocol.
Document-Specific Guidance
Affidavits
Read paragraph by paragraph. For each claim: who made it, what evidence supports it, does anything contradict it? Flag every unsupported claim. Count the paragraphs. Note annexures.
Family/Expert Reports
Focus on: what the expert OBSERVED vs what they were TOLD. Were all relevant people assessed? Do the recommendations follow from the findings? What was buried or downplayed? What recommendations were conditional?
Solicitor Letters/Advice
Assess: is this advice in the client's interest? What options were NOT presented? Was the client pressured? Does the advice align with the evidence?
Court Orders
Track: what was ordered vs what actually happened. Every unfollowed order or recommendation is ammunition.
Communications (SMS, Email)
Note: date, sender, recipient, tone, what was requested, what was the response. Calculate response rates. Build engagement vs avoidance patterns.
Output Format
Save the analysis as a markdown file in the vault's legal-documents/ folder using the naming convention: YYYY-MM-DD_description_analysis.md
Include YAML frontmatter:
---
date: YYYY-MM-DD
type: legal
event_id: [appropriate prefix]-###
people: []
issue: []
source_file: [original filename]
reliability: primary
---
