Anonymised Results From Live Engagements

Casework

Redacted findings from completed forensic engagements. Party names, case references, and identifying details have been removed. The methodology and the numbers remain.

647
Total Findings
3
Binary Findings
534%
Largest Variance
100%
Directional Consistency
6
Independent Methods

Property Dispute — Counterclaim Forensics

Case Profile
Forensic analysis of counterclaim documentation in a property dispute. The opposing party advanced financial claims across multiple categories. Analysis cross-referenced every claimed figure against the documentary record.
Matter Type Property & Construction Dispute
Jurisdiction England & Wales
Documents Analysed Pleadings, correspondence, financial records, witness statements
Deliverable CPR Part 35 compliant forensic report

Binary Findings — No Alternative Explanation Available

Binary
Labour Hours Claim
8,400 hours claimed ÷ 305 working days = 27.5 hours per day
A day contains 24 hours. No explanation was offered for this arithmetic position.
Binary
Floor Cost Variance
£6,438 documented → £40,800 claimed = £34,362 variance (534%)
The documented figure was supported by receipted invoices. The claimed figure was unsupported by contemporaneous material.
Binary
Temporal Inconsistency
Work was claimed across a period exceeding the duration of the company's existence. The company registration date was a matter of public record.
Material (High)
Claim Abandonment
£168,000 labour claim (June) → £0 in formal proceedings (November)
100% reduction. No explanation for the abandonment appeared in the documentary record.
Directional Analysis
Variances favouring one party 100%
Variances favouring the other party 0%
Overall claim reduction (June demands to formal proceedings) 65%
Documented claims producing precise figures Receipted invoices, exact amounts
Undocumented claims producing round figures £40,000 | £168,000 | £17,000
Classification Count Evidential Threshold
Binary 3 Arithmetically or logically irreconcilable with the documentary record
Material (High) 8 Downgraded from Binary after adversarial stress-testing
Material 114 Significant evidential weight
Strong 208 Notable evidential support
Supporting 314 Corroborative value
Adversarial Stress-Testing Protocol

Findings initially classified as Binary were subjected to adversarial challenge. Where any theoretical alternative explanation existed — however improbable — the finding was downgraded to Material (High). This produced 8 downgrades. The 3 remaining Binary findings survived because no alternative explanation could be constructed.

OSINT Cross-Referenced Into Evidence

The Cross-Reference Principle in Practice

A disputed email sat at the centre of the case. Standard analysis would examine the email in isolation. Our investigation began with the sender.

Open-source intelligence research identified the sender's professional history: 8+ years at companies whose core products included email authentication protocols, encryption gateway technology, and digital security infrastructure.

The professional background was cross-referenced against the technical requirements of the disputed communication. The knowledge required to authenticate an email and the knowledge required to construct one that resists authentication are two aspects of the same expertise.

The documentary record placed this individual as the sender of the disputed email. The alleged creditor was merely CC'd on their own purported debt communication.

Open Source
Professional history recovered from public sources
Cross-Reference
Expertise mapped against technical requirements of disputed evidence
Disclosure
Specific forensic traces identified for recovery

The OSINT findings converted a general authentication question into a specific, actionable forensic pathway. The analysis identified the precise digital traces that would exist — email headers, server logs, authentication records — and what a disclosure application would unlock.

Background information became litigation evidence when it intersected with the documentary record.

OSINT Finding
Professional Endorsements
Public endorsements described the subject as having "extremely detailed commercial proposals" and the ability to "negotiate multiple interests with flair and diplomacy."
The disputed email contained sophisticated commercial framing of an alleged debt. Both records were documented.
OSINT Finding
Sender / Recipient Anomaly
The individual with 8+ years of email security expertise was the sender of the disputed communication.
The alleged creditor — the person whose debt the email purportedly documented — appeared only as a CC recipient.

Six Independent Methods

Six independent analytical methods were applied to the documentary record. Each operated on different evidential material using different analytical frameworks. The findings of all six converged on a consistent evidential position.

01
Financial Analysis
Claimed figures compared against documented figures across all financial categories
02
Timeline Reconstruction
Chronological mapping of all events, identifying sequence irregularities
03
Evidence Gap Identification
Documentation that would exist if claims were accurate, mapped against what was produced
04
Contradiction Analysis
Statements compared across documents for internal and external consistency
05
Commercial Plausibility
Claims tested against market rates, industry standards, and commercial norms
06
OSINT Research
Open-source intelligence cross-referenced against positions taken in proceedings
Documentation Vacuum

The analysis applied the Wisniewski adverse inference framework to identify categories where documentation would reasonably be expected to exist. 16 months of alleged work valued at £168,000 produced no invoices, no timesheets, and no contemporaneous records. A camera system was installed at the property. 669 claimed visits produced no footage and no visitor logs.

The significance of these absences is a matter for the tribunal.

Stated Urgency vs Documented Timeline

Behavioural Pattern
Urgency Overstatement
72-hour deadline imposed → 147-day delay before proceedings
The ratio between stated urgency and actual conduct was 49:1. No explanation was offered for this discrepancy.
Documentation Pattern
Precision Inversion
Documented claims produced precise figures: £6,438.01, £5,082.50.
Undocumented claims produced round figures: £40,000, £168,000, £17,000.
This pattern was consistent across all financial categories.

Contact

intel@blackwireintelligence.ai

Contact