Chronology
Put events, observations, actions, and outcomes into a sequence a reviewer can follow.
Narrative workspace
From rough notes
to a report ready for review.
LeoPen organizes officer-provided notes into a structured working narrative, then checks the draft against the facts that went into it.
The draft remains open to correction and agency review; missing information is returned as a question, not filled in automatically.
Narrative workflow
A draft connected to its facts.
- 01
Start with officer-provided facts
Enter rough notes, observations, statements, timing, location, and other details the officer can support.
- 02
Build a working narrative
LeoPen organizes the supplied material into a readable draft without changing the report into a legal conclusion.
- 03
Compare draft and fact set
The advisory fact check looks for supplied facts missing from the draft and draft language that needs review.
- 04
Confirm before adding
Potentially relevant prompts require the officer to provide the missing fact; LeoPen does not fill the gap itself.
What it helps organize
The substance of the report.
LeoPen is designed to help an officer turn rough material into a complete, reviewable account while keeping every added detail tied to information the officer can support.
People and statements
Keep identities, roles, statements, and attribution connected to the officer-provided notes.
Locations and timing
Organize dates, times, locations, and scene context without guessing at gaps.
Evidence and injuries
Carry supplied evidence, property, injury, and disposition details into the working narrative.
Missing information
Surface questions when a potentially important detail needs officer confirmation.
Revision and handoff
Keep the result labeled as a working draft through review, copy, and download actions.
Draft context
The draft stays identified as a draft.
The current product marks generated narrative content as a LeoPen working draft and carries review context into copy and download actions.
- Working-draft labeling and version context stay visible with the narrative.
- Interrupted or incomplete generation is not presented as a complete final report.
- Fact-review signals identify items for review rather than silently rewriting them.
- The officer remains responsible for accuracy, wording, decisions, and submission.
What the reviewer receives
A draft with context attached.
A readable working draft
Structured from the officer's supplied material and still open to correction.
A fact-comparison result
Signals supplied facts missing from the draft or wording that may need support.
Confirmation prompts
Questions the officer may answer when a relevant detail was not yet documented.
Visible draft context
Working-draft and review language remains present when the output moves forward.
Continue beyond the rewrite.
See how the narrative continues into fact review, confirmed-fact prompts, selected official instruction comparison, and source inspection.