Missing persons, where the timeline is the case
In a missing persons file, the central question is almost always a question about sequence: who saw them, where, and when — and which accounts of that cannot all be true at once.
The material that answers it is scattered by design. Family statements, friends' accounts, workplace records, camera reviews, phone activity and canvass results each contain a fragment of a timeline, recorded in different formats by different people at different times.
Assembling those fragments into one chronology is slow, and the conflicts between them — two people placing the same person in two places within the same hour — are precisely what needs to be found early rather than late.
Location is the other axis. A place mentioned in a statement, a place named in a document, and a photograph's GPS coordinates are three different kinds of record that need to be looked at together.
What the platform does here
Missing Persons
Timeline reconstruction
Assembles a draft chronology from every dated event across the file so investigators can review gaps, overlaps, and sequences, with each event linked to its source document.
Conflicting accounts surfaced
Timeline conflicts and description mismatches are flagged for investigator review, with the conflicting quotes shown side by side and ranked by severity.
Offline geospatial view
Location mentions and photo GPS data are plotted on a fully offline map, cross-highlighted with the entity graph. No external map service is contacted.
Audio, video and imagery
Recorded interviews and calls are transcribed with speaker separation; CCTV and body-worn footage is summarised scene by scene so investigators can triage what needs a full watch.
Map tiles, transcription, and every model run locally — the file never leaves your hardware.
Other use cases
See it on a case file like yours.
A demonstration runs on a synthetic case in under an hour — ingest, ask hard questions, and verify every citation yourself.