A claims-to-evidence map prevents a loud allegation from becoming the organizing principle of the review. Each row should preserve the claim as made and evaluate it against the available record.
Use separate columns for separate questions
- What exactly was claimed?
- Who made the statement and when?
- Which sources support it?
- Which sources contradict it?
- What proof remains missing?
- What is the current assessment and confidence?
Allow mixed assessments
Public-records disputes are often partly supported and partly unresolved. “Mixed” and “needs evidence” are legitimate states. Forcing every claim into true or false encourages overstatement.
Update without erasing history
When new evidence changes the assessment, preserve the prior source references and explain the new basis in the notes or review log.