Process bodycam, dashcam, surveillance video, deposition recordings, radio traffic, and related records on a dedicated system inside your firm’s controlled environment. Every extracted assertion is designed to resolve to a cited transcript span, exact timestamp, and source-file hash—or be flagged for human review.
Your team should not have to watch hundreds of hours of bodycam, dashcam, surveillance footage, and deposition video twice just to find the few moments that may change a case. Transcript Auditor organizes that media into a timestamped, source-linked evidence record, with every extracted assertion connected to the transcript span and file that supports it. Instead of restarting review from the beginning, your paralegals can move directly from a claim to the underlying evidence.
Built for the people who have to find the moment, verify it, and explain where it came from.
Transcript Auditor does not stop at transcription or generate an unsupported narrative. It produces a structured case packet that separates directly supported facts from disputed, incomplete, inferred, or missing information—and keeps each item connected to its source.
A one-page production-method memorandum covering evidence received, processing steps, model and software versions, verification rules, derivatives created, human-review requirements, and identified limitations. Not an expert report, affidavit, or court certification.
Move from an assertion directly to the evidence that supports, qualifies, disputes, or refutes it—with classification, transcript span, timestamp, source filename, hash, support status, conflicts, and review status.
A chronological view of source-linked events, with disputed sequences and evidence gaps made visible rather than smoothed over.
Known, partially known, inferred, disputed, refuted, negative evidence, and evidence gaps—scored as a structured indication of source support, corroboration, conflict, and review status. Inferred material is never presented as established fact.
An inventory of the evidence reviewed, what was processed successfully, and what could not be fully processed—including hashes, statuses, and version records. Chain-of-custody support, not a court-certified chain of custody by itself.
Segments that do not meet corroboration or confidence requirements are flagged for attorney-supervised verification rather than silently treated as established fact.
Support status vocabulary
Your team is already using AI—or will be soon. The question is not whether AI enters the legal workflow; it is whether confidential matter material is placed into public systems the firm does not control. VaultCraft gives litigation teams a purpose-built local workflow designed to reduce the confidentiality, retention, access, privilege, and verification risks associated with using public AI tools on case material.
You worked to build your firm’s reputation. Do not let the pressure for faster answers push case material into tools that were never designed for privileged litigation work.
Provide your team with the right resource for the job: local processing, source-linked outputs, explicit review flags, and a documented run record.
Public AI service
Matter content enters a third-party platform outside the firm’s direct control.
VaultCraft
Matter processing occurs on a dedicated local system under the approved engagement configuration. Extracted assertions are kept connected to the evidence that supports them—or flagged when they cannot be.
Faster answers should not require weaker evidence handling.
Recent disputes involving the use of public AI tools have made privilege, confidentiality, retention, and discoverability part of the technology decision. VaultCraft is designed to keep matter processing inside a controlled local environment and to preserve a reviewable connection between every extracted assertion and its source. Data handling →
Transcript Auditor runs on a dedicated local system configured for litigation-media processing. The appliance performs transcription, source alignment, structured extraction, review flagging, and packet generation without relying on consumer cloud AI APIs during the matter-processing workflow.
Processing occurs on VaultCraft-controlled hardware operated inside an approved environment for the engagement.
Case-media processing does not depend on consumer cloud AI services for transcription or extraction.
Original evidence files are preserved; processing derivatives may be created while source references remain intact.
Model version, software version, parameters, input hashes, and output hashes are recorded for each run.
Work is organized in matter-specific workspaces with access restrictions and documented closeout.
Uncertain or conflicting material is routed to review rather than presented as settled fact.
Matter Zero is a paid, defined-scope engagement for plaintiff litigation teams evaluating source-verifiable media review without sending case material to consumer cloud AI tools.
Recently closed, resolved, or otherwise suitable matters preferred for the first pilot.
Associated PDFs and records where supported.
Production memorandum, claim-to-evidence matrix, timeline, register, manifest, review queue.
Subject to the terms of a future written deployment agreement, VaultCraft may credit the Matter Zero fee toward a qualifying deployment.
Every sampled assertion either resolves to its cited source span and timestamp or is explicitly identified as requiring human review.
Plus one team working session and a defined verification review.
Tell us about approximate media volume and matter type. We’ll evaluate fit for Matter Zero.
Discuss a Matter Zero pilothello@vaultcraft.dev