Value proposition
The Professional Standard
Architecting the future of Brady/Giglio and Rule 3.09(d) disclosure compliance.
1. The problem: spreadsheet justice
Constructive knowledge gaps
Prosecutors can be held responsible for information they should have known but was buried in inboxes and shared spreadsheets.
Due process failures
Officers often lack a formal mechanism to challenge inaccurate entries, exposing the Bar and the State to litigation risk.
Security risks
Sensitive credibility data stored in unencrypted files is a major 2026 cybersecurity liability.
Standards, security, and fairness must be built into the workflow before the next disclosure crisis hits.
2. The future roadmap: bar-managed workspace
We are designing an optional, private-by-default workspace for authorized Bar members (prosecutors, defense counsel, and ethics committees).
| Feature | The Bar's role | Technical guardrails |
|---|---|---|
| Governance | Define who can read vs. write entries. | Role-based access control and MFA. |
| Due process | Set standards for notice and response. | Automated notification hooks and status labels. |
| Auditability | Require immutable logs for every change. | Blockchain-style change logs for entries and views. |
| Jurisdictional fit | Align rules with local case law. | Configurable fields for state ethics rules. |
3. Strategic value for bar associations
Reduced ethical complaints
Structured disclosure workflows reduce failure-to-disclose complaints against members.
Tech competency compliance
Provide secure alternatives to legacy tracking that meet 2025-2026 standards.
Standardized fairness
Apply Brady/Giglio obligations consistently across the jurisdiction.
4. Partner with us to shape the guardrails
- What qualifies as an entry: sustained findings vs. pending investigations.
- Who has the keys: DA office vs. neutral Bar committee.
- Correction workflow for rehabilitated credibility.
Join the Legal Ethics Advisory Board to help define the standards before launch.
Join the advisory board