Interview Summary
Produces a structured memorandum distilling a witness or subject interview into actionable intelligence for defense teams and investigators.
Prerequisites
- Interview materials — transcript, audio transcription, investigator notes, or preliminary report
- Matter reference — case name/number and investigation context
- Related evidence — prior witness statements, documents shown during interview, or known inconsistencies
Quick Start
Collect interview materials, then generate each section below in order. Mark the document ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT — PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL.
Output Sections
1. Header Block
| Field |
Content |
| Date/Time |
Interview date, start/end time |
| Location |
Interview site |
| Interviewee |
Name, role, relationship to matter |
| Interviewer(s) |
Names, titles |
| Counsel Present |
Defense counsel, interviewee's counsel if any |
| Observers |
Anyone else present |
| Matter Reference |
Case name/number |
| Privilege Marking |
ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT — PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL |
2. Executive Summary
3–5 sentences covering:
- Most significant factual revelations
- Key admissions or denials
- Overall credibility assessment
- Impact on defense theory
3. Substantive Summary
Organize thematically, not chronologically:
- Background & Relationship — connection to events, relevant history
- Key Events — who, what, when, where, why, how per incident
- Knowledge of Other Parties — interactions with co-defendants, witnesses, complainants
- Documents & Communications — documents shown, recognized, referenced; reactions to exhibits
Per theme:
4. Credibility & Demeanor
| Indicator |
Observation |
| Consistency |
Internal contradictions within interview |
| External conflicts |
Contradictions with other evidence or witnesses |
| Demeanor |
Evasiveness, reluctance, confidence on specific topics |
| Motive/Bias |
Relationship factors affecting reliability |
| Corroboration |
Statements supported by independent evidence |
5. Exculpatory / Inculpatory Assessment
| Category |
Statement/Fact |
Significance |
| Exculpatory |
... |
... |
| Inculpatory |
... |
... |
| Ambiguous |
... |
... |
6. Follow-Up & Recommendations
Pitfalls & Checks
- Objectivity — Distinguish interviewee statements, interviewer observations, and analytical assessments. Label each.
- Discoverability — Assume the summary may be disclosed. No speculation, no strategy, no mental impressions beyond factual observations.
- Privilege — Mark header with work-product designation. Do not embed legal strategy.
- Precision — Use exact names, dates, amounts. Flag approximations with
[approx.].
- Verbatim quotes — Use for admissions, denials, key characterizations, and potential impeachment material. Include surrounding context.
- Neutral tone — Factual language only. Label legal conclusions as analysis.
1---2name: interview-summary3description: Generates structured summaries of witness or subject interviews for criminal defense investigations. Distills key facts, verbatim statements, credibility indicators, and follow-up leads. Use when summarizing defense interviews, witness debriefs, subject interrogations, or investigative interview notes.4---5
6# Interview Summary
7
8Produces a structured memorandum distilling a witness or subject interview into actionable intelligence for defense teams and investigators.
9
10## Prerequisites
11
121. **Interview materials** — transcript, audio transcription, investigator notes, or preliminary report
132. **Matter reference** — case name/number and investigation context
143. **Related evidence** — prior witness statements, documents shown during interview, or known inconsistencies
15
16## Quick Start
17
18Collect interview materials, then generate each section below in order. Mark the document `ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT — PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL`.
19
20## Output Sections
21
22### 1. Header Block
23
24| Field | Content |
25|-------|---------|
26| Date/Time | Interview date, start/end time |
27| Location | Interview site |
28| Interviewee | Name, role, relationship to matter |
29| Interviewer(s) | Names, titles |
30| Counsel Present | Defense counsel, interviewee's counsel if any |
31| Observers | Anyone else present |
32| Matter Reference | Case name/number |
33| Privilege Marking | `ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT — PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL` |
34
35### 2. Executive Summary
36
373–5 sentences covering:
38- Most significant factual revelations
39- Key admissions or denials
40- Overall credibility assessment
41- Impact on defense theory
42
43### 3. Substantive Summary
44
45Organize **thematically, not chronologically**:
46- **Background & Relationship** — connection to events, relevant history
47- **Key Events** — who, what, when, where, why, how per incident
48- **Knowledge of Other Parties** — interactions with co-defendants, witnesses, complainants
49- **Documents & Communications** — documents shown, recognized, referenced; reactions to exhibits
50
51Per theme:
52- [ ] Lead with concise factual summary
53- [ ] Embed verbatim quotes for significant statements (quotation marks + context)
54- [ ] Note gaps where interviewee lacked knowledge or memory
55
56### 4. Credibility & Demeanor
57
58| Indicator | Observation |
59|-----------|-------------|
60| Consistency | Internal contradictions within interview |
61| External conflicts | Contradictions with other evidence or witnesses |
62| Demeanor | Evasiveness, reluctance, confidence on specific topics |
63| Motive/Bias | Relationship factors affecting reliability |
64| Corroboration | Statements supported by independent evidence |
65
66### 5. Exculpatory / Inculpatory Assessment
67
68| Category | Statement/Fact | Significance |
69|----------|---------------|--------------|
70| Exculpatory | ... | ... |
71| Inculpatory | ... | ... |
72| Ambiguous | ... | ... |
73
74### 6. Follow-Up & Recommendations
75
76- [ ] Additional witnesses identified (name, contact, expected knowledge)
77- [ ] Documents to obtain
78- [ ] Topics requiring re-interview or clarification
79- [ ] Investigative leads generated
80- [ ] Areas needing corroboration
81
82## Pitfalls & Checks
83
84- **Objectivity** — Distinguish interviewee statements, interviewer observations, and analytical assessments. Label each.
85- **Discoverability** — Assume the summary may be disclosed. No speculation, no strategy, no mental impressions beyond factual observations.
86- **Privilege** — Mark header with work-product designation. Do not embed legal strategy.
87- **Precision** — Use exact names, dates, amounts. Flag approximations with `[approx.]`.
88- **Verbatim quotes** — Use for admissions, denials, key characterizations, and potential impeachment material. Include surrounding context.
89- **Neutral tone** — Factual language only. Label legal conclusions as analysis.
90
91---
CaseMark