# Criminal Responsibility Record Review > Record review for insanity and mental state at the offense: lifetime psychiatric history, pharmacy records and discovery, on one cited timeline. Canonical page: https://medrecords.ai/solutions/criminal-responsibility-record-review/ --- New — **Missing Records Detection:** flags every visit, provider, and date missing from the file. [See how →](https://medrecords.ai/product/missing-records-identification/) [Home](https://medrecords.ai/) ›[Solutions](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/) › — Criminal Responsibility Review CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY RECORD REVIEW ## Mental state at the offense is reconstructed from records, not from the interview. Criminal responsibility record review services assemble what a mental state at the time of the offense evaluation rests on: lifetime psychiatric treatment, pharmacy and emergency department history, custody records and the medical portions of discovery, on one page-cited timeline anchored to the offense date. [Test a file ](https://medrecords.ai/test-a-file/?src=criminal-responsibility-record-review) [Book a demo](https://medrecords.ai/demo/) Click any row → the source page it cites Mental state record digest · Case #IME-4812 documented Adams, Timothy · defendant record 342 pp / 2 packets received logged 11 duplicate pages removed free p.140 — wrong patient quarantined Pages 342 Documents 27 Cited 100% ### The test is statutory. The jury applies it. We do not build for a case type until we can name the standard that defines a correct output and the person who grades the file against it. In criminal responsibility evaluations, both are already published. The standard and the referee The rulebook - The forum’s insanity standard, whether the M’Naghten cognitive test, the ALI Model Penal Code §4.01 formulation, a guilty but mentally ill statute, or the federal severe mental disease or defect standard at 18 U.S.C. §17 - Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b) and its state analogues, which bar the expert from stating the ultimate conclusion on mental state in a criminal case - Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68 (1985), which entitles an indigent defendant to expert assistance where sanity is a significant factor - The AAPL practice guideline for the forensic psychiatric evaluation of defendants raising the insanity defense The referee - The jury, which decides the mental state question the expert is barred from answering directly - The trial court at a Rule 702 hearing, and again under Rule 704(b) on how far the opinion may go - The prosecution’s rebuttal evaluator, who reads the same lifetime record for the entries the defence report omitted An insanity opinion undercut by a pharmacy record showing the prescription was never filled From 10¢ to as low as 5¢/page here, duplicates free Mental state record digest · Case #IME-4812 cited 100% Packet — 342 pp / 2 packets · 11 deduplicated — logged Lifetime psychiatric history — Every contact, diagnosis and hospitalization — cited Pharmacy and adherence — Filled, refilled, lapsed, by date — cited The offense window — Every record entry inside the anchor period — flagged Digest delivered · cited 100% · no mental state opinion How it works ### 3 steps between the record and the mental state opinion. 01 #### Send everything, including discovery Lifetime psychiatric and primary care records, emergency department visits, pharmacy fill history, substance use treatment, jail records and the medical portions of discovery, in any format. 02 #### Get the digest back, anchored to the offense date One timeline with the offense date marked, so the weeks either side of it are readable on their own, with adherence and substance use carried as their own cited rows. 03 #### The evaluator opines within the rule The mental state opinion is the evaluator’s, stated within the limits Rule 704(b) sets. The digest is the cited record beneath it. The boundary, in writing ### A cited record, not an opinion on sanity. We assemble and cite what the record documents. We do not evaluate the defendant, apply an insanity standard, opine on appreciation of wrongfulness or capacity to conform conduct, or state any conclusion on mental state. Those are the evaluator’s and, ultimately, the jury’s. Pharmacy fill history is the quietest evidence in one of these files and it is frequently the loudest at trial. It is carried as a cited row of its own, with the gap between prescription and fill visible by date rather than summarized away. Audit trail · Case #IME-4812 exportable 08:12 — Packet received · 342 pp / 2 packets — system 08:31 — 11 pages deduplicated — system 08:44 — p.140 flagged — wrong patient — system 08:54 — Mental state record digest complete · digest delivered · cited 100% — system 09:20 — Mental state record digest reviewed · citations verified — reviewer 09:26 — Mental state record digest exported · report structure assembled by the evaluator — reviewer Every access logged · file deleted 30 days after delivery Why Medrecords AI ### The rules the platform never breaks. EVERY LINE CITED CASE #IME-4812 · ADAMS, T. 342 pp 2/14 — ER visit, right knee p.4 4/18 — arthroscopic surgery p.61 p.140 — wrong patient quarantined Medrecords AI Read every page · cite every line #### HIPAA, under a signed BAA Every file is handled under our Business Associate Agreement, from the first byte. #### Never trains a model Your records are never used to train any AI model — ours or anyone else's. #### Every line cited If we can't cite it, we don't say it. Every sentence links to its source page. #### Deleted after delivery Files are deleted 30 days after delivery, with a full audit log of every access. Powered by the platform ### 7 capabilities behind every mental state record digest. The mental state record digest is one deliverable of the same platform that reads, sorts, and cites the whole record. [ #### Medical Records OCR Decades of records across a dozen systems, read in full, including handwritten community mental health notes. IN ACTION · 3,400 pp / 12 sources, read in full ](https://medrecords.ai/product/ocr/) [ #### Medical Chronology The offense date anchors the timeline, so the period that decides the case is not buried in a chronological summary. IN ACTION · lifetime history → offense window, one timeline ](https://medrecords.ai/product/chronology/) [ #### Verifiable AI Citations Every entry links to its page, so a rebuttal expert citing an omission is answered from the same file. IN ACTION · digest → cited 100% ](https://medrecords.ai/product/citations/) [ #### Medical Summary Reports It exports into the evaluator’s report structure, with the sections the AAPL guideline expects already populated. IN ACTION · digest → report structure ](https://medrecords.ai/product/summaries/) [ #### Medical Record Deduplication Forty charts pulled from multiple practices and EHR migrations carry their share of duplicate visit notes. Each is matched and collapsed to one canonical record, so the prescribing pattern is read once per real encounter. IN ACTION · 40 charts → duplicate visit notes collapsed to 1 record each ](https://medrecords.ai/product/medical-record-deduplication/) [ #### Missing Records Identification A prescribing pattern read across 40 charts is only as sound as the file behind it. When a chart references a visit, refill, or referral that never made it into the production, the gap is flagged before the pattern goes to the board. IN ACTION · prescribing pattern cross-checked → gaps flagged before submission ](https://medrecords.ai/product/missing-records-identification/) [ #### Cross-Exam Simulator (beta) A board investigator or defense counsel builds a case from the chart abstraction. This beta tool maps the questioning a physician facing that hearing is likely to face on the gaps and pattern in their own record. A rehearsal tool, not legal advice. IN ACTION · prescribing pattern → likely hearing questions mapped (beta) ](https://medrecords.ai/product/cross-exam-simulator/) FAQ ### Criminal responsibility review, answered. No. Rule 704(b) bars even the retained expert from stating the ultimate conclusion, and we are not the expert. We assemble the cited record: lifetime psychiatric history, adherence, substance use and every entry inside the offense window. Because the question is mental state at a moment, not in general. A timeline that runs flat across thirty years hides the two weeks that matter. Anchoring puts the offense window on its own footing with the pages behind it. Yes. The same cited digest is what a rebuttal evaluator needs first: the entries that are in the record and not in the defence report, with pages. No. Medrecords AI does not retrieve records from providers or facilities. You bring the records you already have — review starts in minutes from upload. Retrieval vendors take days; you can keep yours and still cut the review to minutes. ### Send one file. We'll tell you what we can read. No obligation. If the case type is buildable we'll scope it; if it isn't, we'll say so. [Test a file ](https://medrecords.ai/test-a-file/?src=criminal-responsibility-record-review) [Book a demo](https://medrecords.ai/demo/) [See every case type we process →](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/case-types/)