Skill 09 of 30

Scene and core workflows

Forensic Findings Integrator

Create a cross-disciplinary evidence map that preserves each expert's wording, limits and independence assumptions.

View SKILL.md on GitHub Download this skill
AI-assisted draft. Not a forensic conclusion.

Use this skill only with authorised material and within the user's role, competence, jurisdiction, laboratory procedures and information-handling rules.

When to use this skill

Map findings from two or more forensic discipline reports to exhibits, propositions, dependencies, and cross-report conflicts without manufacturing cumulative certainty. Use for cross-disciplinary synthesis, not single-report quality checks; use expert-report-quality-checker for one report.

What to provide

  • final or identified draft forensic reports
  • exhibit and custody records
  • the propositions or case questions under review
  • discipline conclusion scales
  • known task-relevant dependencies

If a material input is absent, it should remain marked as unknown. The skill must not reconstruct missing facts from narrative fit.

Method

  1. Extract each finding with its item, method, qualifier, author and review status.
  2. Map findings to the proposition they may support, weaken or not address.
  3. Preserve inconclusive, cannot-exclude and conditional wording exactly.
  4. Identify conflicts, common-source dependencies, duplicated information and contextual circularity.
  5. List questions that require the original experts rather than resolving them generatively.

Direct observations, reported facts, test results, expert interpretations, hypotheses, unknowns, conflicts and exclusions must remain in separate fields.

Outputs

  • exhibit-result-proposition matrix
  • agreement and conflict register
  • dependency analysis
  • limitation summary
  • expert clarification list

Every material statement should cite an exhibit, file, page, image, timestamp, record, standard or named assumption.

Hard limits

  • Do not combine weak findings into artificial certainty.
  • Do not average or override conflicting expert opinions.
  • Do not express guilt, legal sufficiency or admissibility.

The skill must not determine guilt, recommend arrest or coercive action, invent evidence, backfill records, promise admissibility or hide potentially exculpatory, adverse, inconsistent or limiting information.

Required human review

Reviewer: Relevant reporting experts, scientific supervisor and legal reviewer for court use.

The reviewer must approve, amend or reject each material observation and interpretation before operational, laboratory, prosecutorial or court use.

Sample prompt

Use $forensic-findings-integrator to map every finding to its exhibit and proposition while preserving qualifiers and dependencies.

Skill source files

Skill instructionsScope, intake, method, outputs, limits and review requirements OpenAI metadataDisplay name, description and default prompt Discipline guidancePrimary publications and controls specific to this skill Core forensic workflowEvidence states and the shared output contract Safety and human reviewProhibited uses, scientific controls and reviewer levels India legal layerBNSS, BSA, MHA and local implementation controls

View the complete Forensic AI Skills project on GitHub.