Investigation & Evidence · Statement Corroborator
Cross-reference statements against source documents
Turn interview statements and written claims into a claim-by-claim corroboration matrix — each claim mapped to supporting or conflicting source material, with confidence and gaps explicit.
Illustrative content · Public sources only
| Claim | Corroboration status | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Stated role and tenure | Supported by two documents | High |
| Timeline of key meeting | Partially supported | Medium |
| Claimed approval received | Contradicted by record | Medium |
| Payment authorization detail | No source found | Low |
A decision-ready artifact
What you get
A focused brief that keeps the evidence, uncertainty, and next actions visible.
- Claim-by-claim corroboration matrix with source references
- Corroborated facts with supporting citations
- Flagged contradictions between statements and documents
- Uncorroborated claims requiring further evidence
- Confidence notes for each corroboration call
- Suggested follow-up questions for the next interview or review
Start with what you know
What you can enter
From input to source-linked brief
- 01Statement intake
Provide the statements, transcripts, and source documents you hold.
- 02Claim extraction
Break statements into discrete, checkable claims with attribution.
- 03Cross-reference
Map each claim to supporting, conflicting, or absent source material.
- 04Corroboration brief
Review a structured matrix with contradictions and follow-ups flagged.
Use cases
Check a subject's account against the documentary record before the next session.
Cross-reference multiple accounts of the same events for an investigator.
Test management representations against provided documents and public filings.
Organize which assertions are documented and which rest on testimony alone.
What this is not
4S8 works with public sources, your case material, and source-linked analysis to support human review — not to replace legal, compliance, or investigative judgment.
- Corroboration signals, not truth or credibility verdicts
- Works on provided material and public filings only
- Not a lie-detection or deception-analysis tool
- Not a legal determination or admissible finding
- Human review required before any conclusion
Frequently asked questions
Does it decide whether someone is telling the truth?
No. It maps each claim to supporting or conflicting source material with confidence notes. Judging credibility remains a human decision.
What material can I cross-reference statements against?
Documents you provide — transcripts, records, correspondence — plus public filings and links. It does not access private databases.
How are contradictions presented?
Each contradiction is shown claim by claim with the conflicting sources cited side by side, so a reviewer can weigh them directly.
What happens with claims that have no matching source?
They are flagged as uncorroborated with suggested follow-up questions — an absence of corroboration is treated as a gap, not as proof of falsehood.
Start with a source-linked brief
Start free — begin now and get a structured, reviewable artifact back.
Corroborate statements