Sample investigation · Risk and compliance
A compliance analyst sees a regional supplier named in forty items. The record shows they all lead back to a single unattributed post.
Illustrative An invented example. No real client, event or organisation, and the figures are samples. Sample record 7A-D-000802, SAMPLE · 22 SEP 2026 · 17:45 local.
Items repeating it
across eleven days
Independent origins
an unattributed post
Primary documents
none linked
Unmarked edits
to the lead item
01 Headline
Forty items repeat the claim. None names an official, and none links a document.
40Items repeating it
Forty items is a loud signal and a thin one. The analyst reads the claim once and asks where it began.
Dispatch
SAMPLE · 22 SEP 2026 · 17:45 local
Forty items repeat the claim. None names an official, and none links a document.
The question
Does the claim justify pausing a purchase order, or does it need a second origin first?
02 Sources
An origin is the first to report something. A repeat only passes it on. Counting origins shows how many separate voices there really are.
2Origins among 5 sources shown
The ledger separates the one origin from the repeats. The only primary source checked, the authority’s register, has no entry. Absence in a register is not proof, and the record says so.
Source ledger
| Source | Role | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Anonymous post, trade forum | Origin | 28 |
| Trade site, cites the post | Repeat | 44 |
| Business daily, relays trade site | Repeat | 62 |
| Newsletter, no sourcing | Repeat | 31 |
| Export authority register, no entry | Primary | 88 |
2 of 5 shown report on their own or are the document itself
03 Six-axis audit
The audit asks who, what, when, where, why and how. Each question gets its own confidence from 0 to 100. A weak answer is marked contested instead of being averaged away.
Who and what rest on one anonymous post, so they carry low confidence and a contested mark. How is the high reading: the path of the claim from post to repeat is well documented.
Six-axis audit
Who
An unnamed official, per every item.
What
An inquiry into export paperwork.
When
Between 11 and 13 September, by inference.
Where
The supplier’s home jurisdiction.
Why
Not given in any item.
How
Passed from the post to the trade site, then on.
04 Impact
The impact matrix does not forecast. It lists where the claim, if it holds, would touch each of nine areas, and how strongly.
Legal and financial readings are highest, because a real inquiry would touch contracts and credit terms. The matrix shows exposure if the claim were true, not that it is.
Impact matrix
05 Dossier
Supplier inquiry claim: provenance and status. The file is fixed as it stood on 22 SEP 2026 · 19:10 local. A later correction would be a new entry.
The analyst a that holds the chain and a recommendation to wait for a second origin. The file shows what was known on the day the decision was made.
Dossier
Sealed 22 SEP 2026 · 19:10 local. Later changes become new entries.
The order is held pending a primary document or a second independent origin.
What happened next. The purchase order waits. A watch on the supplier will flag a second origin or a posted notice, whichever comes first.
Next
Open the live demo, or ask for access and we will walk through a case from your desk.