{
  "$schema": "https://iarpg.com/evidence-attribution-review-packet.schema.json",
  "record_type": "iarpg-evidence-attribution-review-packet",
  "release": "IARPG-OPS-2",
  "version": "2.0.30-wip",
  "id": "https://iarpg.com/evidence-attribution/review-readiness/packets/anonymous-legal-cases.json",
  "source_id": "anonymous-legal-cases",
  "title": "Anonymous in Courts and Law-Enforcement Records",
  "short_title": "Courts and law-enforcement records",
  "review_state": "awaiting-qualified-human-review",
  "publication_state": "blocked",
  "preserved_source": {
    "original_filename": "Anonymous Legal Cases Research(2).md",
    "path": "docs/source-files/evidence-attribution-oversight-and-leaderless-networks/Anonymous Legal Cases Research(2).md",
    "url": "/docs/source-files/evidence-attribution-oversight-and-leaderless-networks/Anonymous%20Legal%20Cases%20Research%282%29.md",
    "bytes": 51415,
    "sha256": "d75dae6dbd7867922505b2a10f10d1c6d649f2fd8d2173a223c2cb0c401b8ffe",
    "declared_cutoff": "2026-07-24"
  },
  "preserved_wrapper": {
    "url": "/docs/report/anonymous-in-courts-and-law-enforcement-records#reviewed-synthesis",
    "report_slug": "anonymous-in-courts-and-law-enforcement-records",
    "review_state": "reviewed-with-limitations"
  },
  "preserved_review_register": "/evidence-attribution-research-review-register.json",
  "source_requirement": "/evidence-attribution/review-readiness/source-requirements/anonymous-legal-cases.json",
  "source_level_questions": [
    {
      "question_id": "EARR-Q-anonymous-legal-cases-01",
      "category": "legal-status",
      "question": "What exact allegation, charge, element, disposition, appeal, remedy, and precedential status does the primary court record establish?",
      "required_evidence": "Qualified, attributable, dated evidence appropriate to this category; source origin and scope must be recorded.",
      "reviewer_response": null,
      "reviewer_notes": null,
      "reviewer_identity_reference": null,
      "review_status": "unanswered"
    },
    {
      "question_id": "EARR-Q-anonymous-legal-cases-02",
      "category": "current-facts",
      "question": "Have appeals, resentencing, statutory amendments, expungement, record corrections, or later judgments changed the reported status?",
      "required_evidence": "Qualified, attributable, dated evidence appropriate to this category; source origin and scope must be recorded.",
      "reviewer_response": null,
      "reviewer_notes": null,
      "reviewer_identity_reference": null,
      "review_status": "unanswered"
    },
    {
      "question_id": "EARR-Q-anonymous-legal-cases-03",
      "category": "translation",
      "question": "Was each non-English judgment reviewed by a qualified legal translator or lawyer, including procedural vocabulary and burdens of proof?",
      "required_evidence": "Qualified, attributable, dated evidence appropriate to this category; source origin and scope must be recorded.",
      "reviewer_response": null,
      "reviewer_notes": null,
      "reviewer_identity_reference": null,
      "review_status": "unanswered"
    },
    {
      "question_id": "EARR-Q-anonymous-legal-cases-04",
      "category": "technical-attribution",
      "question": "Does the evidence establish a named person's conduct, custody, and digital artifact, or is it being overgeneralized into movement structure or collective guilt?",
      "required_evidence": "Qualified, attributable, dated evidence appropriate to this category; source origin and scope must be recorded.",
      "reviewer_response": null,
      "reviewer_notes": null,
      "reviewer_identity_reference": null,
      "review_status": "unanswered"
    },
    {
      "question_id": "EARR-Q-anonymous-legal-cases-05",
      "category": "affected-community-perspectives",
      "question": "What perspectives from defendants, victims, journalists, civil-liberties groups, and affected service users are necessary to understand rights and harm?",
      "required_evidence": "Qualified, attributable, dated evidence appropriate to this category; source origin and scope must be recorded.",
      "reviewer_response": null,
      "reviewer_notes": null,
      "reviewer_identity_reference": null,
      "review_status": "unanswered"
    },
    {
      "question_id": "EARR-Q-anonymous-legal-cases-06",
      "category": "privacy",
      "question": "Can the legal record be summarized without exposing sealed, juvenile, irrelevant personal, or victim information?",
      "required_evidence": "Qualified, attributable, dated evidence appropriate to this category; source origin and scope must be recorded.",
      "reviewer_response": null,
      "reviewer_notes": null,
      "reviewer_identity_reference": null,
      "review_status": "unanswered"
    },
    {
      "question_id": "EARR-Q-anonymous-legal-cases-07",
      "category": "rights",
      "question": "Are presumption, counsel, public trial, evidence integrity, proportionality, expression, journalism, and due process accurately represented?",
      "required_evidence": "Qualified, attributable, dated evidence appropriate to this category; source origin and scope must be recorded.",
      "reviewer_response": null,
      "reviewer_notes": null,
      "reviewer_identity_reference": null,
      "review_status": "unanswered"
    },
    {
      "question_id": "EARR-Q-anonymous-legal-cases-08",
      "category": "remedy",
      "question": "What appeal, acquittal, dismissal, correction, restitution, sentence review, or rights complaint is available or documented?",
      "required_evidence": "Qualified, attributable, dated evidence appropriate to this category; source origin and scope must be recorded.",
      "reviewer_response": null,
      "reviewer_notes": null,
      "reviewer_identity_reference": null,
      "review_status": "unanswered"
    }
  ],
  "disposition_reviews": [
    {
      "claim_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-01",
      "topic": "legal status",
      "preserved_disposition": "retained-method-guidance",
      "preserved_statement": "Use precise procedural labels: alleged, charged, pleaded, convicted, acquitted, dismissed, appealed, or upheld.",
      "adjudication_slot": "/evidence-attribution/review-readiness/adjudication-slots/EAR-OPS2-229-08-01.json",
      "review_questions": [
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-01-Q1",
          "category": "evidence-and-wording",
          "question": "Does the bounded statement for 'legal status' stop at the highest supported attribution rung and preserve claimant, status, confidence, reliability, and scope separately?",
          "preserved_statement": "Use precise procedural labels: alleged, charged, pleaded, convicted, acquitted, dismissed, appealed, or upheld.",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        },
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-01-Q2",
          "category": "source-and-translation",
          "question": "Which current primary, authoritative, locally authored, affected-community, or original-language source is required to confirm, qualify, contradict, or supersede this disposition?",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        },
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-01-Q3",
          "category": "rights-remedy-and-publication-effect",
          "question": "What privacy, rights, remedy, correction, and publication effect follows from the review, and what must remain blocked or redacted?",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        }
      ],
      "review_state": "unanswered"
    },
    {
      "claim_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-02",
      "topic": "chain of custody",
      "preserved_disposition": "retained-method-guidance",
      "preserved_statement": "Record acquisition, hashes, preservation, handling, and procedural objections separately from claim truth.",
      "adjudication_slot": "/evidence-attribution/review-readiness/adjudication-slots/EAR-OPS2-229-08-02.json",
      "review_questions": [
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-02-Q1",
          "category": "evidence-and-wording",
          "question": "Does the bounded statement for 'chain of custody' stop at the highest supported attribution rung and preserve claimant, status, confidence, reliability, and scope separately?",
          "preserved_statement": "Record acquisition, hashes, preservation, handling, and procedural objections separately from claim truth.",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        },
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-02-Q2",
          "category": "source-and-translation",
          "question": "Which current primary, authoritative, locally authored, affected-community, or original-language source is required to confirm, qualify, contradict, or supersede this disposition?",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        },
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-02-Q3",
          "category": "rights-remedy-and-publication-effect",
          "question": "What privacy, rights, remedy, correction, and publication effect follows from the review, and what must remain blocked or redacted?",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        }
      ],
      "review_state": "unanswered"
    },
    {
      "claim_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-03",
      "topic": "movement generalization",
      "preserved_disposition": "bounded",
      "preserved_statement": "Do not use a case against named defendants to establish centralized leadership or collective culpability.",
      "adjudication_slot": "/evidence-attribution/review-readiness/adjudication-slots/EAR-OPS2-229-08-03.json",
      "review_questions": [
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-03-Q1",
          "category": "evidence-and-wording",
          "question": "Does the bounded statement for 'movement generalization' stop at the highest supported attribution rung and preserve claimant, status, confidence, reliability, and scope separately?",
          "preserved_statement": "Do not use a case against named defendants to establish centralized leadership or collective culpability.",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        },
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-03-Q2",
          "category": "source-and-translation",
          "question": "Which current primary, authoritative, locally authored, affected-community, or original-language source is required to confirm, qualify, contradict, or supersede this disposition?",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        },
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-03-Q3",
          "category": "rights-remedy-and-publication-effect",
          "question": "What privacy, rights, remedy, correction, and publication effect follows from the review, and what must remain blocked or redacted?",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        }
      ],
      "review_state": "unanswered"
    },
    {
      "claim_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-04",
      "topic": "current law",
      "preserved_disposition": "requires-current-verification",
      "preserved_statement": "Recheck statutes, amendments, appeals, judgments, and court records before jurisdiction-specific reuse.",
      "adjudication_slot": "/evidence-attribution/review-readiness/adjudication-slots/EAR-OPS2-229-08-04.json",
      "review_questions": [
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-04-Q1",
          "category": "evidence-and-wording",
          "question": "Does the bounded statement for 'current law' stop at the highest supported attribution rung and preserve claimant, status, confidence, reliability, and scope separately?",
          "preserved_statement": "Recheck statutes, amendments, appeals, judgments, and court records before jurisdiction-specific reuse.",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        },
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-04-Q2",
          "category": "source-and-translation",
          "question": "Which current primary, authoritative, locally authored, affected-community, or original-language source is required to confirm, qualify, contradict, or supersede this disposition?",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        },
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-04-Q3",
          "category": "rights-remedy-and-publication-effect",
          "question": "What privacy, rights, remedy, correction, and publication effect follows from the review, and what must remain blocked or redacted?",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        }
      ],
      "review_state": "unanswered"
    },
    {
      "claim_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-05",
      "topic": "illegal methods",
      "preserved_disposition": "safety-restricted",
      "preserved_statement": "Do not reproduce attack, unauthorized-access, credential, evasion, or target-selection methods from case records.",
      "adjudication_slot": "/evidence-attribution/review-readiness/adjudication-slots/EAR-OPS2-229-08-05.json",
      "review_questions": [
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-05-Q1",
          "category": "evidence-and-wording",
          "question": "Does the bounded statement for 'illegal methods' stop at the highest supported attribution rung and preserve claimant, status, confidence, reliability, and scope separately?",
          "preserved_statement": "Do not reproduce attack, unauthorized-access, credential, evasion, or target-selection methods from case records.",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        },
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-05-Q2",
          "category": "source-and-translation",
          "question": "Which current primary, authoritative, locally authored, affected-community, or original-language source is required to confirm, qualify, contradict, or supersede this disposition?",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        },
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-05-Q3",
          "category": "rights-remedy-and-publication-effect",
          "question": "What privacy, rights, remedy, correction, and publication effect follows from the review, and what must remain blocked or redacted?",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        }
      ],
      "review_state": "unanswered"
    },
    {
      "claim_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-06",
      "topic": "media correction",
      "preserved_disposition": "retained-method-guidance",
      "preserved_statement": "Correct shorthand that confuses initial charges with final disposition or visibility with official authority.",
      "adjudication_slot": "/evidence-attribution/review-readiness/adjudication-slots/EAR-OPS2-229-08-06.json",
      "review_questions": [
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-06-Q1",
          "category": "evidence-and-wording",
          "question": "Does the bounded statement for 'media correction' stop at the highest supported attribution rung and preserve claimant, status, confidence, reliability, and scope separately?",
          "preserved_statement": "Correct shorthand that confuses initial charges with final disposition or visibility with official authority.",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        },
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-06-Q2",
          "category": "source-and-translation",
          "question": "Which current primary, authoritative, locally authored, affected-community, or original-language source is required to confirm, qualify, contradict, or supersede this disposition?",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        },
        {
          "question_id": "EAR-OPS2-229-08-06-Q3",
          "category": "rights-remedy-and-publication-effect",
          "question": "What privacy, rights, remedy, correction, and publication effect follows from the review, and what must remain blocked or redacted?",
          "response": null,
          "status": "unanswered"
        }
      ],
      "review_state": "unanswered"
    }
  ],
  "reviewer_owned_fields": {
    "reviewer_identity_or_consented_anonymity": null,
    "qualification_and_scope": null,
    "legal_qualification": null,
    "translation_qualification": null,
    "technical_attribution_qualification": null,
    "local_or_affected_community_relationship": null,
    "conflict_and_funding_disclosure": null,
    "review_completion": null
  },
  "publication_blockers": [
    "Independent qualified human review has not been supplied.",
    "Qualified jurisdiction-specific legal review has not been supplied.",
    "Qualified human translation and original-language review have not been supplied where required.",
    "Locally informed and affected-community review have not been supplied.",
    "Technical attribution has not been independently validated for current factual reuse.",
    "No accountable editorial adjudication or publication approval has been documented."
  ],
  "durable_report": "/docs/report/evidence-attribution-review-readiness-anonymous-in-courts-and-law-enforcement-records#review-readiness",
  "public_method": "/evidence-attribution/reviews",
  "non_scoring_boundary": "This packet contains questions and empty evidence fields, not a rating or ranking of any source, reviewer, community, person, organization, or jurisdiction.",
  "truth_boundary": "Structural readiness only. Reviewer-owned fields remain unanswered and no human, legal, local, technical, translation, editorial, or publication approval is implied."
}