NewMissing Records Detection: flags every visit, provider, and date missing from the file. See how →
HomeSolutionsPolice Use-of-Force Record Review
POLICE USE-OF-FORCE RECORD REVIEW

The medical record holds the one fact the incident report has to survive.

Police use-of-force record review services build the injury record into a cited timeline: the first medical contact and its documented mechanism, every photograph and imaging study, and the treatment course, set against the incident chronology. Mechanism opinions stay with your experts.

Click any row → the source page it cites
Injury and force timeline · Case #IME-4812 documented
Adams, Timothy · incident file
342 pp / 2 packets received logged
11 duplicate pages removed free
p.140 — wrong patient quarantined
Pages 342 Documents 27 Cited 100%

Documenting injury inflicted by state actors has a published method.

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 use-of-force cases the legal standard and the documentation method are both published, and the referee is a federal court applying them to this record.

The standard and the referee
The rulebook
  • 42 U.S.C. §1983 and the objective reasonableness standard of Graham v. Connor, under which what the officers perceived and what the body shows are separate questions on the same record
  • The Istanbul Protocol, 2022 edition, whose method for documenting injuries inflicted by state actors applies to custodial and use-of-force injury regardless of the forum
  • The Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death and the NAME Forensic Autopsy Performance Standards, where the encounter was fatal
  • Fed. R. Evid. 702 as amended in December 2023, under which a mechanism of injury opinion has to be reliably applied to this record
The referee
  • The federal district court at summary judgment on qualified immunity, which reads the medical record against the force the officers say they used
  • The medical examiner or coroner in a death case, whose manner of death finding the case either adopts or has to overcome
  • A monitor under a consent decree or a Department of Justice pattern or practice review, which read the same records across incidents rather than one at a time
An injury record never lined up against the incident timeline From 10¢ to as low as 5¢/page here, duplicates free
Injury and force timeline · Case #IME-4812 cited 100%
Packet342 pp / 2 packets · 11 deduplicatedlogged
First documented mechanismCarried verbatim from the first medical contactcited
Injury inventoryEvery finding, photograph and imaging studycited
Account conflictsWhere the records describe the mechanism differentlyflagged
Timeline delivered · cited 100% · no mechanism opinion
How it works

3 steps between the incident file and the timeline.

01

Send the incident file

EMS and jail intake records, emergency department and hospital charts, imaging, clinical photographs, and the autopsy where there is one, in any format.

02

We return the timeline, page-cited

Every injury documented at each contact, the mechanism as each provider recorded it, the imaging and photographs, and the treatment course from first contact forward.

03

Your experts take it from there

How each injury was produced, and whether the force used was objectively reasonable, are questions for your medical and police practices experts.

The boundary, in writing

A timeline of the injury record, not an opinion on the force used.

We assemble and cite what the medical and forensic records document. We do not opine on how an injury was produced, whether the force was reasonable, or whether an officer’s account is truthful. Those belong to your retained experts and to the court.

In the demo case, page 140 turned out to belong to a different patient. In a custodial file that error moves an injury onto the wrong person, so it is quarantined rather than reconciled quietly.

Audit trail · Case #IME-4812 exportable
08:12Packet received · 342 pp / 2 packetssystem
08:3111 pages deduplicatedsystem
08:44p.140 flagged — wrong patientsystem
08:54Injury and force timeline complete · timeline delivered · conflicts flagged · cited 100%system
09:20Injury and force timeline reviewed · citations verifiedreviewer
09:26Injury and force timeline exported · expert packet assembled by counselreviewer
Every access logged · file deleted 30 days after delivery
Why Medrecords AI

The rules the platform never breaks.

Medrecords AI 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 injury and force timeline.

The injury and force timeline is one deliverable of the same platform that reads, sorts, and cites the whole record.

Medical Records OCR

Every page read in full, including the jail intake screening where injuries are first recorded.

IN ACTION · 342 pp / 2 packets → 27 documents, read in full

Medical Chronology

Contacts across EMS, custody and hospital assemble from their own timestamps into one sequence.

IN ACTION · first contact → current treatment, one continuous timeline

Verifiable AI Citations

Every entry links back to its page, including the accounts that do not agree.

IN ACTION · timeline → cited 100%

Medical Summary Reports

It exports into your summary judgment opposition or expert packet in your format.

IN ACTION · timeline → expert packet

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

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

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)
FAQ

Police use-of-force record review, answered.

No. We carry the mechanism verbatim from each medical record and flag where the accounts differ. A mechanism of injury opinion is expert testimony, offered under Rule 702 by a qualified physician or forensic pathologist.

Because it is usually recorded before anyone has a legal theory. What EMS or jail intake wrote down, and when, is the least contested description of the injury in the file, which is why it belongs at the head of the timeline with its page attached.

The autopsy findings and the certified manner of death are carried verbatim and placed beside the clinical record, with conflicts flagged. We do not contradict the medical examiner. A competing opinion is expert testimony from a qualified forensic pathologist.

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.