Published

Offense / Investigation

vr.wm-pol-008 · wm-pol-008-offense-investigation

Represent one persistent investigation dossier containing qualified allegations, procedural assertions and links to independently mastered evidence and outcomes.

World Models Society, people and institutions SOC.POL.OFF

Bundle → Layer → Finding → Questions Classifiers What it is Why it exists Distinguishing features What robots and AI may and may not do Moral aspects Owners Links to other meta-models Identity and identifiers Direct properties Recognition Capabilities and actions Hazards and failure modes Standards and interfaces Context of use Sources

Bundle → Layer → Finding → Questions Filled

6 bundles · 12 layers · 12 findings · 36 questions

Dossier and alleged conduct Identify the dossier and qualify the alleged conduct.

Dossier identity

Preserve one dossier identity and explicit links across transfers, splits and related inquiries. Similar parties or alleged acts do not establish duplicate identity.

Qualified investigation identity

Preserve one dossier identity and explicit links across transfers, splits and related inquiries. Similar parties or alleged acts do not establish duplicate identity.

Which authority namespace and stable reference identify this investigation dossier? identity
How are related dossiers, alleged acts and split or joined matters linked without conflating their identities? composition
Who is accountable for this dossier and which transfer record supports a change of custodian? ownership

Allegation and classification

Keep alleged conduct and domestic legal qualification separate from an optional statistical code. Retain reclassification history and disputed mappings.

Qualified conduct and code assertions

Keep alleged conduct and domestic legal qualification separate from an optional statistical code. Retain reclassification history and disputed mappings.

What conduct is alleged and what is its assertion status rather than an assumed offense finding? definition
Which legal provision version and optional statistical scheme support each classification assertion? classification
What occurrence time range and location are asserted, with what precision and competing accounts? spatial

Mandate and participants Record authority and role-specific safeguards.

Authority and initiation

Record the legal profile and opening assertion. Operational allocation or possession of data is not proof of competence; unknown legal authority prevents action.

Evidenced authority and initiation

Record the legal profile and opening assertion. Operational allocation or possession of data is not proof of competence; unknown legal authority prevents action.

Which jurisdictional mandate and delegation support the recorded investigation scope? authority
What report, referral or other authorized trigger supports the opening assertion? event
Which limits, expiry conditions and review requirements constrain any referenced investigative measure? constraint

Participants and safeguards

Maintain role assertions and safeguard requirements without prejudging conduct. Subject access, counsel access, witness protection and public access are distinct scopes.

Role-specific rights and protection

Maintain role assertions and safeguard requirements without prejudging conduct. Subject access, counsel access, witness protection and public access are distinct scopes.

Which party references have which case-specific roles, and when did those role assertions change? relationship
Which representation, language, age-related or other safeguard needs require qualified review in this matter? requirement
How are vulnerable-party identities and contact details separated from wider dossier views? privacy

Inquiry and evidence context Preserve balanced reasoning and linked evidence assessments.

Inquiry review

Index reviewable questions and evidence gaps, including material pointing away from an allegation. This is policy-level case reasoning, not collection instructions.

Balanced and bounded inquiry record

Index reviewable questions and evidence gaps, including material pointing away from an allegation. This is policy-level case reasoning, not collection instructions.

Which case question and recorded rationale support each proposed or completed inquiry reference? process
What contrary material or alternative explanation has been linked and what remains unevaluated? evidence
What necessity and privacy assessment limits the scope of any third-party material request? constraint

Evidence links and continuity

Link externally mastered items and versions to assertions. Local review can identify missing custody evidence but cannot repair a custody gap or decide admissibility.

Evidence attribution and continuity assessment

Link externally mastered items and versions to assertions. Local review can identify missing custody evidence but cannot repair a custody gap or decide admissibility.

Which evidence master, version and derivation support each dossier assertion? provenance
Which received continuity records contain gaps, conflicting times or unexplained transformations? quality
Which competent assessment distinguishes relevance, integrity and admissibility for the linked material? validation

Disclosure and procedural continuity Track permitted views and evidenced administrative progress.

Disclosure and access

Separate inventory, review, disclosure authorization and actual delivery. Relevance or a public hearing does not automatically make the entire dossier public.

Recipient-specific disclosure decisions

Separate inventory, review, disclosure authorization and actual delivery. Relevance or a public hearing does not automatically make the entire dossier public.

What material is authorized for each recipient and purpose at this stage? access
Which restrictions or redactions have a recorded basis and review or challenge route? exception
What delivery evidence and outstanding obligations distinguish approved disclosure from completed disclosure? evidence

Lifecycle and time

Dossier status reflects recorded administration, not guilt or legal finality. Legal due dates require profile authority, calendars and qualified computation.

Evidenced progress and review obligations

Dossier status reflects recorded administration, not guilt or legal finality. Legal due dates require profile authority, calendars and qualified computation.

What recorded event supports the current open, suspended, transferred or closed dossier status? state
Which event, recording and legally effective times apply, and which deadlines remain unresolved? temporal
What competent review permits a closure, correction or reopening assertion without erasing earlier outcomes? lifecycle

Referral and external outcomes Link formal decisions while preserving external ownership.

Charge and referral

Separate recommendation, charging decision, recorded filing and accepted referral. A charge may change or be withdrawn, and an investigation may end without one.

Formal accusation and handoff references

Separate recommendation, charging decision, recorded filing and accepted referral. A charge may change or be withdrawn, and an investigation may end without one.

Which authorized decision supports each charge, no-charge or alternative-disposal assertion? decision
Which charge revision links which accused-party reference to which alleged conduct and legal provision? relationship
What evidence confirms submission and acceptance or rejection by the receiving prosecution or forum? event

External outcomes and sanction reports

Preserve the legacy sanction context as external outcome and execution-report links. Never impose or execute a penalty, infer finality from closure, or require a sanction in every investigation.

Qualified post-decision references

Preserve the legacy sanction context as external outcome and execution-report links. Never impose or execute a penalty, infer finality from closure, or require a sanction in every investigation.

Which external case and decision revisions dispose of which parties and allegations? relationship
What evidence separately supports reported finality, enforceability, appeal or suspension status? state
Which authorized external report supports a sanction or correction-status entry, and what remains outside dossier control? evidence

Stewardship and projections Control record continuity and qualified downstream use.

Record stewardship

Preservation duties and lawful correction or disposal require an adopting policy. A record of change must not become indefinite retention of every personal payload.

Scoped retention correction and disposal

Preservation duties and lawful correction or disposal require an adopting policy. A record of change must not become indefinite retention of every personal payload.

Which record-specific schedule, review trigger and hold govern each dossier payload and derived copy? retention
How are disputed or inaccurate assertions corrected and affected recipients identified? quality
Which approved disposition record governs deletion, restriction or preservation of a particular payload? authority

Projection and acceptance

Build authorized local projections with explicit qualification and loss reports. Statistical aggregation needs disclosure review; a conviction exchange cannot be inferred from an investigation record.

Bounded exports and conformance gaps

Which pinned destination profile preserves identity, legal status, provenance and restriction qualifiers? interoperability
What counting unit, denominator and privacy review justify a proposed statistical projection? measurement
Which adversarial fixtures and independent reviews are still required before this dossier profile is used operationally? validation

Classifiers Filled

Family: World Models
Category: Society, people and institutions
Entry kind: entity
Navigation path: NAV.SOC.POL.OFF
Domain: SOC.POL.OFF
Industry: Cross-industry
Tags: offenseinvestigationsoc.pol.off
Also called: A18

What it is Filled

One authority-qualified investigation dossier is the root. It can address multiple alleged acts and parties, and reference related investigations without merging their identities. An alleged offense is an assertion about conduct, not a finding of guilt. This policy-level research covers local records and reference indexes through review and closure, including optional post-decision reports; it neither authorizes nor executes enforcement.

In scope

Dossier identity, alleged occurrence, national legal qualification and optional statistical mapping
Mandate, participants, safeguards, inquiry review, evidence links and disclosure decisions
Local lifecycle, charge/referral assertions, external decisions and sanction-status references, retention and authorized projections

Out of scope

Determining guilt, imposing sanctions, executing detention or corrections, tactical investigation, weapons and controlled-item handling
Evidence-item master lifecycle, physical custody operations, forensic methods, court case and judgment masters
Person, public-office, law and authorization masters; intelligence targeting, predictive enforcement, production integrations and automated legal decision making

Why it exists Filled

Represent one persistent investigation dossier containing qualified allegations, procedural assertions and links to independently mastered evidence and outcomes.

Distinguishing features Derived, awaiting review

Unlike Legacy A18 / world.offenseEnforcement: Reconcile as historical input. Retain offense, investigation and sanction context, but sanctions and correction execution are external reports. An investigation need not produce a charge, conviction or correction.
Unlike WM-POL-009 Court / Arbitration Case and WM-POL-010 Dispute Forum: Optional separately identified case and forum references. Legacy prose alternates A19 and A6; neither alias is admitted as an automatic binding. Referral does not create or prove acceptance of a court case.
Unlike WM-POL-020 Evidence Item / Exhibit: Evidence objects, custody events and admissibility decisions remain externally mastered. This dossier owns only relevance links and attributed assessments of received custody evidence, including gaps.
Unlike WM-POL-021 Judgment / Legal Decision: Reference decision revision, scope and reported legal status. Imposition, finality, enforceability, appeal and execution are independent assertions and are never inferred from dossier state.
Unlike ICCS and ECRIS: ICCS supports optional statistical mappings; ECRIS describes a distinct criminal-record exchange context. Neither defines investigation identity or makes an allegation a conviction.

Note: Derived from boundary notes against neighbouring models.

What robots and AI may and may not do Derived, awaiting review

Must not

Local deletion cannot erase external evidence masters, annul decisions or prove fulfillment of a sanction.
Deny dossier-content access unless recipient, purpose and scope are authorized.

May

Resolve a dossier reference: Proposed operation, not implemented. Resolve an exact qualified master reference; return ambiguity instead of merging matters by similarity.
Record an allegation assertion: Proposed operation, not implemented. Append an attributed account and legal or statistical qualification without declaring guilt.
Link evidence and assessment: Proposed operation, not implemented. Append relevance and continuity-assessment links without altering evidence masters, custody events or admissibility decisions.
Record a procedural assertion: Proposed operation, not implemented. Record an already evidenced state, charge, handoff or outcome assertion, preserving separate authority and effect.
Report structural and evidence gaps: Proposed operation, not implemented. Inspect the authorized view for missing references, conflicting assertions and overdue recorded review obligations; legal interpretation remains with qualified reviewers.
Prepare an authorized local projection: Proposed operation, not implemented. Construct a recipient-scoped local view with provenance, restrictions and mapping losses. Refuse loss of mandatory qualifiers.

Note: Derived from functions, policies, CRUD and access rules; prohibitions were not authored for agents as such.

Moral aspects Derived, awaiting review

Restrict vulnerable-party details and sensitive material.
Review authority, safeguards, charging and outcome references without delegating decisions to this model
Records and privacy officer
Source-grounded proposed structure for one authority-qualified investigation dossier, with allegations, safeguards, evidence links and external outcome context.
Mandate, participants, safeguards, inquiry review, evidence links and disclosure decisions

Note: Sentences mentioning harm, privacy, consent or similar, collected from the specification.

Owners Filled

Steward

Competent public authority and accountable dossier custodian, evidenced without commercial owner attribution

Roles

Dossier custodian: Maintain identity and evidenced stewardship
Authorized investigating officer: Record supported assertions within mandate; preserve contrary material
Legal reviewer: Review authority, safeguards, charging and outcome references without delegating decisions to this model
Disclosure officer: Assess recipient scopes and restricted views
Records and privacy officer: Resolve retention, correction, holds and lawful disposition
Subject or authorized representative: Challenge or inspect only the permitted record scope under applicable rights

Links to other meta-models Filled

references

WM-POL-009 - Optional adjudication case master; candidate binding must be pinned. The dossier does not own court procedure.
WM-POL-010 - Optional adjudication forum master; forum competence requires separate evidence.
WM-POL-020 - Evidence item master and custody records remain external; dossier links alone grant no control of an item.
WM-POL-021 - Optional judgment or legal-decision master; preserve version and effect qualifiers.
Person and public-office master bindings - Adopter resolves identities and authority namespaces; no inferred identity matching or authority from infrastructure ownership.
Sanction execution authority and record binding - Optional external reports only, preserving legacy correction context at policy level; operational execution is excluded.

aligned

ICCS 1.0 - Statistical code mapping only; national legal qualification remains separate.
ECRIS profile - Possible future criminal-record projection only; eligibility, wire schema and legal basis unverified.
PROV-O - Conceptual attribution and derivation, not a legal or forensic conformance claim.

neighbor

Legacy A18 / world.offenseEnforcement - Reconcile as historical input. Retain offense, investigation and sanction context, but sanctions and correction execution are external reports. An investigation need not produce a charge, conviction or correction.
WM-POL-009 Court / Arbitration Case and WM-POL-010 Dispute Forum - Optional separately identified case and forum references. Legacy prose alternates A19 and A6; neither alias is admitted as an automatic binding. Referral does not create or prove acceptance of a court case.
WM-POL-020 Evidence Item / Exhibit - Evidence objects, custody events and admissibility decisions remain externally mastered. This dossier owns only relevance links and attributed assessments of received custody evidence, including gaps.
WM-POL-021 Judgment / Legal Decision - Reference decision revision, scope and reported legal status. Imposition, finality, enforceability, appeal and execution are independent assertions and are never inferred from dossier state.
ICCS and ECRIS - ICCS supports optional statistical mappings; ECRIS describes a distinct criminal-record exchange context. Neither defines investigation identity or makes an allegation a conviction.

What else AI and robots need to interact with it Incomplete

Sources Filled

International Classification of Crime for Statistical Purposes - registry entry - United Nations Statistics Division
European Convention on Human Rights - Council of Europe
Disclosure Manual Chapter 4 - Relevance, Recording and Retention - Crown Prosecution Service
Disclosure Manual Chapter 5 - Reasonable Lines of Enquiry and Third Parties - Crown Prosecution Service
The Code for Crown Prosecutors - Crown Prosecution Service
Guide to Law Enforcement Processing - Principles - Information Commissioners Office
PROV-O: The PROV Ontology - World Wide Web Consortium
Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps - Internet Engineering Task Force
European criminal records information system (ECRIS) - European Union Publications Office

Open questions

Obtain independent external review and complete current-source and legal-profile verification before canonical promotion.
Develop typed dossier profiles and fixtures for no-charge closure, partial outcomes, disputed identity, custody gaps, withheld material, review, erasure and lossy projections.
Review specialist procedure coverage and pin separately owned evidence, case, decision and sanction-report interfaces before operational integration.
Independent external review absent; local no-tools self-audit is not a second provider.
Direct HTTP checks not attempted under owner-reported sandbox restrictions; current legal versions, applicability, translations and licensing remain unverified.
Typed nested schemas, custody standards, legal calendars, interface bindings and executable conformance fixtures are incomplete.
Correction execution, detention operations, forensics and criminal-record exchange are outside this dossier boundary.
Non-European and specialist procedures and a complete legal-rights catalogue require additional source research.

Machine files

Card as JSON Specification AGENTS.md Source Card backlog vercy.card/1

Provenance

world-models research · reviewable-draft

Built from: models/wm-pol-008-offense-investigation/spec.yaml