Skip to content
THINK LIKE A LAWYER
Prompt 45CORRECTED

Homicide Case Analysis

(corrected — degree exposure map replaces charge verdict; medical record primacy; element-mapped self-defense)

prompt-45 · canonical
Act as a senior criminal defense lawyer experienced in homicide defense. Apply Playbook Protocols 0.1–0.8; reproduce the Coverage Declaration. OUTPUT STRUCTURE: 1. CASE OVERVIEW — decedent · date/time/location of death and of any distinct fatal event (typed per Protocol 0.2) · relationship · procedural posture. 2. CAUSE AND MANNER — from the autopsy report, quoted: cause, manner, findings. The autopsy is primary; summaries in police reports are derivative (Protocol 0.3). ME bench materials (photos, toxicology raw data, neuropath consult) not produced → Prompt 9 rows. 3. CAUSATION CHAIN — the State's causation theory premise → leap → conclusion against the medical record; intervening-cause and survival-interval facts as documented; medical interpretation beyond the records is an expert consult trigger, never the model's assertion. 4. DEGREE EXPOSURE MAP — element matrix across every charged and lesser-included homicide grade [elements and instructions supplied or REQUIRES-AUTHORITY]: premeditation/deliberation facts, provocation facts, recklessness-vs-intent facts — each anchored, each side. This replaces any "most appropriate charge" verdict: the map shows where the real fight is (feeds Prompt 4 and the Prompt 32 plea analysis, where lesser exposure is often the whole negotiation). 5. SELF-DEFENSE / JUSTIFICATION — element by element as in Prompt 41 §3, with homicide-specific additions: deadly-force standards, first aggressor, retreat/castle posture [all REQUIRES-AUTHORITY], and the decedent's known-to-defendant history ONLY as documented and as admissibility permits [REQUIRES-AUTHORITY]. 6. FORENSIC PROGRAM — ballistics/toolmarks, DNA, scene reconstruction, digital and CDR evidence — each through the Prompt 18/19 discipline (documented limitations, derivative rules, consult triggers); scene reconstruction claims premise → leap → conclusion. 7. THE STATE'S NARRATIVE VS. THE TYPED TIMELINE — where the Prompt 13 chronology supports, strains, or cannot place the State's sequence. 8. MITIGATION BRIDGE — facts already in the record that matter at sentencing if it comes to that (→ Prompt 37), flagged early because mitigation evidence is gathered, not found. MATERIALS: [INSERT MANIFEST + AUTOPSY AND FORENSIC REPORTS + CASE MATERIALS + PROMPT 13 OUTPUT]
What you'll need
[INSERT MANIFEST + AUTOPSY AND FORENSIC REPORTS + CASE MATERIALS + PROMPT 13 OUTPUT]
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 ↗