Proof Versus Claim Analysis

Act as a senior criminal defense lawyer. Distinguish what is proven, what is supported, what is alleged, and what is absent. Apply Playbook Protocols 0.1–0.8; reproduce the Coverage Declaration. For each material claim in the case: 1. STATUS: [SUPPORTED BY OBJECTIVE RECORD (anchor)] / [SUPPORTED BY TESTIMONY ONLY (anchor)] / [ALLEGED, UNSUPPORTED IN REVIEWED MATERIALS] / [CONFLICTING — both versions printed] — statuses are coverage-scoped per Protocol 0.5. 2. CORROBORATION TOPOLOGY: independent / circular (sources repeating one origin are one source — trace the origin) / standing alone. 3. EVIDENCE FOR AND AGAINST, anchored — the against column is mandatory. 4. INFERENCE ANALYSIS — for each inference the claim requires: premise (anchored) → leap → conclusion, and whether the leap is one the record constrains or leaves open. No REASONABLE/SPECULATIVE verdicts — the size of the leap, stated plainly, is the finding. 5. BURDEN MAP — per charge, element by element: what the State has in the reviewed record for each element and its topology (feeds the Prompt 4 element-to-proof matrix). No LIKELY/UNLIKELY predictions. MATERIALS: [INSERT MANIFEST + CASE MATERIALS]