Methodology

How we source and verify

Sources we use

• Police and sheriff department websites and official public statements.
• City and county press releases and public meeting materials.
• Reputable local news publications.
• Public crime-data portals and government transparency dashboards.
• Publicly accessible vendor case studies (clearly labeled Vendor-Reported).

We do not bypass logins, paywalls, CAPTCHAs, robots.txt restrictions, or platform access controls. Our researchers can only reach material that is publicly accessible.

Verification states

• Verified. Supported by an official agency source, or by two credible independent sources.
• Single-Source Report. One attributable and credible public source.
• Vendor-Reported. Described by the technology provider or a customer case study; not independently confirmed.
• Developing. Facts or outcome remain incomplete.

Language

We do not say technology "solved" a crime unless the underlying source explicitly supports that conclusion. We prefer precise language: generated an alert, helped identify a vehicle, provided an investigative lead, contributed evidence, was cited by police as assisting the investigation.

Safety and privacy

• We do not publish victim names unless already broadly public and essential to the story.
• We do not publish exact residential addresses. Map locations are generalized.
• We do not publish license plate numbers.
• We do not identify minors.
• We do not infer guilt. Allegations, arrests, charges, and convictions are labeled differently.
• We note meaningful privacy, governance, and civil-liberties concerns where relevant.

Editorial process

Every discovered item enters an internal review queue before publication. Reviewers can approve, edit, request another source, reject, or mark as a duplicate. Confidence scores reflect a reviewer's assessment of source quality and corroboration, not statistical probability.