A precise-looking report without a precise observation
A fictional officer is preparing a report after a confusing event. A dispatch message establishes that the officer arrived after 14:05 and a callback establishes arrival before 14:12, but no source identifies the exact minute. The officer saw a vehicle leave but could not identify its driver. Another person later supplied a name without explaining how they knew. A draft report states an exact arrival time and says the named person was seen driving. A reviewer has access to the original messages and notes and can ask for clarification. Students must separate direct observations, attributed information and unsupported precision, explain how a genuine amendment should preserve the record history and avoid treating a polished narrative as a substitute for evidence.
1. Which claims exceed the evidence?
Read the worked answer
The exact minute and direct driver identification are not established. The supported interval and the actual limits of observation should be stated, with the later name attributed to its source.
2. How should the draft be corrected?
Read the worked answer
Make supported, dated changes using the original messages and notes, preserving the basis and history. Do not silently reconstruct a more certain account than the evidence supports.