Quarky AccusationDefender AI
See an example analysis below

Zero Data Retention: your evidence is processed, not stored.

Every evidence angle a judge cares about.

Paste a police report, text thread, witness statement, or bodycam transcript. The AI extracts every constitutional, evidentiary, and procedural angle a trial judge would rule on: hearsay, 404(b), Brady, chain of custody, credibility, and Colorado-specific statutes, in seconds.

See an exampleHow it works
9-point
Judicial checklist
Zero
Data retention
Seconds
To full analysis

Zero Data Retention: QuarkyAccusationDefender processes your evidence and doesn't keep it. For informational purposes only, not legal advice.

Example analysis

See what an analysis looks like

Below is a fictional Colorado police report and the kind of defense-oriented analysis you get for your own evidence.

1. The evidence

Fictional sample · Sample Police Report
DENVER POLICE DEPARTMENT: INCIDENT REPORT
Case #: 24-DV-00417
Date / Time of Report: 03/14/2024  23:41
Reporting Officer: Ofc. M. Reyes #4821
Offense: Domestic Violence, Third Degree Assault (CRS 18-3-204), Harassment (CRS 18-9-111)

SUMMARY:
On the above date and time, dispatch advised of a 911 hang-up at 1842 W. 33rd Ave. Upon arrival I made contact with the reporting party (RP), Jane D. (DOB 07/12/1992). RP was seated on the front porch, crying intermittently. RP advised that her boyfriend, John S. (DOB 02/03/1989), "grabbed her by the wrist and shoved her into the wall" during an argument about money. RP stated this occurred approximately 30 minutes prior to the call.

I observed faint redness on RP's left wrist but no swelling, bruising, or laceration. RP declined medical attention. RP stated she had consumed "a couple drinks" earlier in the evening. I noted a moderate odor of an alcoholic beverage on RP's breath and slightly slurred speech.

John S. was contacted inside the residence. He stated the argument was verbal only, that RP had thrown a glass at him (a broken glass was observed near the kitchen entry), and that he had grabbed her wrist to stop her from throwing a second glass. He had a small cut on his right forearm consistent with that account. He was calm and cooperative.

Neighbor, K. Alvarez (1844 W. 33rd Ave.), advised she "heard yelling but no thumps or screams." No other witnesses.

Per Colorado mandatory arrest policy under CRS 18-6-803.6, John S. was placed under arrest as the suspect identified by the RP and transported to Denver County Jail.

Note: RP advised at the scene she "just wants him out for the night" and "doesn't want him charged." Officer advised her that under Colorado law charging decisions are made by the District Attorney.

End of report.
Analyze your own evidence Jump to the example result ↓

2. Every angle a judge cares about

The AI walks a full judicial checklist ( constitutional, evidentiary, procedural, substantive, and credibility ) and surfaces every angle a trial judge in Colorado would rule on.

  • 1.Summary of Evidence
  • 2.Key Defense Angles & Reasonable Doubt
  • 3.Judicial Hot Buttons (4th/5th/6th, hearsay, 404(b), Brady…)
  • 4.Credibility Issues
  • 5.Evidence Strength, Weakness & Discovery to Demand
  • 6.Relevant Colorado Law & Statutes
  • 7.Strategic Next Steps & Motions
  • 8.Risk Warnings
  • 9.Overall Case Strength
Judge's lens: Each angle is framed the way a judge will evaluate it: fact → rule/doctrine → use (motion, cross-examination, or jury argument).
Zero Data Retention

When you analyze your own evidence, it's processed in memory and not stored. Your data isn't kept once the job is done.

2. Example result (pre-written for this sample)
Analysis complete
100%
  1. Summary of evidence
  2. Defense angles & reasonable doubt
  3. Judicial hot buttons
  4. Credibility issues
  5. Evidence strength & weaknesses
  6. Relevant law & statutes
  7. Strategic next steps & motions
  8. Risk warnings
  9. Overall case strength
Defense Analysis

1. Summary of Submitted Evidence

  • Source: Denver PD incident report, Case #24-DV-00417, written by Ofc. M. Reyes on 03/14/2024 at 23:41.
  • Allegation: Third-degree assault and harassment. The reporting party (RP) says John S. grabbed her wrist and shoved her into a wall during an argument about money, about 30 minutes before the 911 call.
  • Officer observations: "faint redness" on the RP's left wrist; no swelling, bruising or laceration; RP declined medical care; odor of alcohol and slightly slurred speech; RP admits "a couple drinks."
  • Accused's account: argument was verbal; the RP threw a glass at him; he grabbed her wrist to stop a second throw. A broken glass was found near the kitchen and he had a small cut on his right forearm.
  • Independent witness: neighbor K. Alvarez "heard yelling but no thumps or screams."
  • Gaps: no photos, bodycam, 911 audio or medical records referenced; the 911 call was a hang-up.

2. Key Defense Angles & Reasonable Doubt Opportunities

  • Self-defense / defense of person: the physical evidence (broken glass, fresh cut on his forearm) corroborates his account that he grabbed her wrist to stop a thrown object.
  • Minimal injury, consistent with either version: faint redness without bruising fits a brief restraining grip as well as the alleged shove, and nothing documents injury from hitting a wall.
  • Neighbor heard no impact: "no thumps or screams" cuts against being shoved into a wall.
  • Intoxication of the RP: alcohol odor and slurred speech bear on her perception and memory of a fast-moving event.
  • RP did not want charges: "just wants him out for the night" suggests the call may have been about separation, not assault.

3. Judicial Hot Buttons: Every Angle a Judge Cares About

Constitutional Issues (4th / 5th / 6th / 14th Amendment)

  • Were his statements made before or after he was in custody? If questioning continued after arrest without Miranda warnings, statements may be challenged.
  • Confrontation (6th Amendment): if the RP does not testify, her statements to the officer face hearsay and confrontation limits at trial.

Evidentiary Issues (Hearsay, 404(b), Authentication, Privilege, 403)

  • The RP's porch statements may be offered as excited utterances; the 30-minute gap and her composure are relevant to whether that exception applies.
  • Watch for any attempt to introduce prior incidents (CRE 404(b)); none are mentioned in this report.

Procedural & Investigative Issues

  • Predominant-aggressor analysis: Colorado's mandatory-arrest statute (CRS 18-6-803.6) directs officers to identify the predominant aggressor when both parties show signs of conflict. The report records his cut and the broken glass but no analysis of who was the aggressor; the arrest is described as based on the RP identifying him.
  • No photos of either party's injuries or the scene are referenced.

Substantive / Merits Issues

  • Third-degree assault requires proof of bodily injury (pain or impairment). The only documented sign is faint redness, with no complaint of pain recorded.

Witness & Credibility Issues

  • The officer recorded both accounts and both sets of physical evidence, which are useful neutral facts for the defense.

4. Credibility Issues with Accuser / Witnesses

  • Intoxication at the time of the events and of the interview.
  • Her account (shoved into a wall) is not supported by the neighbor's "no thumps," or by any documented injury beyond faint redness.
  • She did not mention throwing a glass; the broken glass and his cut are unexplained by her version.
  • Her stated goal ("just wants him out for the night") may indicate a motive other than reporting an assault.

5. Evidence Strength & Weaknesses

  • Strengths for the defense: broken glass, his forearm cut, no bruising, neighbor's account, RP intoxication, RP's wish not to press charges.
  • Weaknesses / risks: he admits grabbing her wrist; the redness is on that wrist; a 911 call was placed.
  • Missing, Request in Discovery: bodycam footage from all responding officers, the 911 recording and CAD log, any scene or injury photos, the officer's full notes, and any medical records.

6. Relevant Colorado Law & Statutes

  • Third-degree assault (CRS 18-3-204): requires knowingly or recklessly causing bodily injury.
  • Harassment (CRS 18-9-111).
  • Mandatory arrest & predominant aggressor (CRS 18-6-803.6).
  • Self-defense (CRS 18-1-704): force reasonably believed necessary to defend against the imminent use of unlawful force.
  • Hearsay (CRE 801–803); prior acts (CRE 404(b)); discovery (Crim. P. 16).

7. Suggested Strategic Next Steps & Motions

  • Discovery demand for bodycam, the 911 audio/CAD, photos and notes (Crim. P. 16).
  • Preserve your own evidence now: photograph the forearm cut and keep any medical record of it; note who cleaned up the broken glass.
  • Ask your attorney about a motion in limine on any prior-acts evidence, and whether a self-defense instruction is supported.
  • Ask about the protection order: request modification if it is broader than necessary.

8. Risk Warnings & Cautionary Advice

  • Do not contact the RP in any way if a protection order is in place, even to "talk it out."
  • Do not post about the case online or discuss it with anyone except your attorney.
  • Admitting the wrist grab without context can be harmful. Let your attorney frame it.

9. Overall Case Strength Assessment

  • Defense position: moderate to strong on these facts. The physical evidence supports self-defense and the injury evidence is thin. The outcome will depend heavily on bodycam, the 911 audio, and whether the RP testifies.

Disclaimer

This is an example produced for illustration from a fictional report. It is informational only, not legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed. Always consult a licensed attorney or your Public Defender.

Want to dig deeper? Continue with guided cross-questions to build a stronger defense narrative.

Get this for your case: see plans
How it works

Built for defendants, families, and pro se litigants

Every accusation deserves a careful look. We surface the angles your attorney or Public Defender will want to know.

1

Paste or upload your evidence

Police reports, text threads, victim statements, bodycam transcripts, personal notes: anything related to your case.

2

Select your state & evidence type

Defaults to Colorado with built-in statute knowledge. Other states adapted with jurisdiction-specific framing.

3

Get a defense-oriented analysis

Reasonable doubt angles, credibility issues, missing discovery, applicable statutes, suggested motions, and next steps.

Zero Data Retention

Processed, not stored.

QuarkyAccusationDefender processes your evidence and doesn't keep it. Your prompts and responses aren't stored by default Analyses and Advisor conversations are discarded once the job is done, unless you choose to save them.

Conversations aren’t retained

QuarkyAccusationDefender doesn’t retain your analyses or AI Legal Advisor conversations. Nothing is written to our database unless you turn on saving.

Encrypted AI processing

Analysis runs on end-to-end encrypted AI models, so the model provider never sees your evidence in plaintext.

  • Processed, not stored.
  • Transient by design.
  • Your data, not ours.
  • Zero retention. Maximum trust.
  • Nothing kept unless you save it.

What is saved, only when you choose it: analyses you save to history, Advisor conversations you turn on "Save this conversation" for, links you share, and intake forms you submit to an attorney. These are stored in your account (or the firm's) with account-scoped access, and saved conversations can be deleted from your dashboard.

Not legal advice. This is an AI tool, not a substitute for a licensed attorney or your Public Defender. Avoid pasting Social Security numbers, full account numbers, or other unnecessary identifiers.