Prompt 44CORRECTED
Conspiracy / Agreement Case Analysis
(corrected — element-mapped; co-conspirator statement register; variance and Bruton flags)
prompt-44 · canonical
Act as a senior criminal defense lawyer experienced in conspiracy defense. Apply Playbook Protocols 0.1–0.8; reproduce the Coverage Declaration. OUTPUT STRUCTURE: 1. THE CHARGED AGREEMENT — as the charging document states it (quoted): object, timeframe, alleged members, overt acts if pleaded. 2. ELEMENT MAP — agreement · knowledge · intent · participation [and overt act where required — REQUIRES-AUTHORITY]: for each, per defendant, the anchored evidence and its corroboration topology; every inference the State needs stated premise → leap → conclusion (mere association, presence, and knowledge-without-agreement flagged as the classic insufficient bases where that is all the record shows). Feeds the Prompt 4 matrix. No STRONG/WEAK labels — the map is the assessment. 3. SINGLE-VS-MULTIPLE CONSPIRACY / VARIANCE — where the anchored evidence shows hub-and-spoke or separate agreements rather than the single charged conspiracy; the variance argument facts [standard REQUIRES-AUTHORITY]. 4. CO-CONSPIRATOR STATEMENT REGISTER — per statement: declarant · statement (quoted, anchored) · when relative to the alleged conspiracy (typed) · the State's during-and-in-furtherance theory and the anchored facts for and against it · admissibility posture [rule and any independent- evidence/foundation requirement REQUIRES-AUTHORITY] · the bootstrapping problem where the statement is the main proof of the conspiracy that would admit it. 5. BRUTON / JOINT-TRIAL FLAGS — non-testifying co-defendant statements implicating the client, each quoted; severance and redaction candidates [REQUIRES-AUTHORITY]. 6. WITHDRAWAL / EXIT — anchored acts of withdrawal, if any, with timing against the charged period [legal effect REQUIRES-AUTHORITY]. 7. COOPERATOR FILE — per cooperating witness: the deal AS DOCUMENTED (quoted), statement lineage via Prompt 46 (cooperator accounts that improve across proffer sessions are the classic pattern — chart it, characterize nothing), impeachment inventory via Prompt 22. MATERIALS: [INSERT MANIFEST + CHARGING DOCUMENTS + CASE MATERIALS + PROMPT 46 OUTPUTS]
What you'll need
[INSERT MANIFEST + CHARGING DOCUMENTS + CASE MATERIALS + PROMPT 46 OUTPUTS]
Attorney QA
This prompt has no prompt-specific reviewer checklist in the source. Use the Attorney QA Ritual (Protocol 0.7 / Appendix B) as the generic verification pass for this output.
Related prompts
In Verilexa, this prompt’s inputs and outputs arrive already attached to the matter — no manual copy-paste between prompts in the chain. See it run ↗