Independence Policy

Decisions concerning whether to investigate, publish, update, correct or continue reporting on a matter are made according to LegalEvidence’s evidentiary, editorial and legal standards.

Financial contribution, professional status, personal influence, commercial importance or threats to withdraw business must not determine an editorial outcome.

The same standard applies whether the subject is an individual, private company, public company, government official, institution or other organisation.

LegalEvidence does not accept money, gifts, services, favors or other consideration in exchange for:

• Removing a record
• Suppressing evidence
• Delaying publication
• Concealing a material source
• Changing an evidence classification without evidentiary grounds
• Removing an accurate adverse finding
• Softening accurate reporting
• Preventing an investigation
• Publishing a favourable conclusion

No employee, journalist, investigator, lawyer, contractor or representative of LegalEvidence is authorised to negotiate such an arrangement.

Any subject may challenge a LegalEvidence record without paying LegalEvidence.

Where reliable evidence establishes that a material statement is inaccurate, incomplete or no longer reflects the underlying record, LegalEvidence may correct, clarify or update the publication in accordance with its Corrections Policy.

A person does not receive preferential consideration because they are a paying member. Likewise, a person is not denied a legitimate correction because they are not a member.

LegalEvidence may charge fees for Research Membership, professional research tools, LE Intelligence System (LEIS) access and related services. Those fees relate to the services provided to the member.

Membership does not provide a right to:

• remove a record;
• control an investigation;
• approve editorial copy;
• change an evidence grade;
• prevent publication;
• require favourable coverage; or
• obtain a correction unsupported by evidence.

A member may provide documents or request review of a record. Those materials are assessed under the same evidentiary standards applied to submissions from non-members.

Where membership includes access to legal research or professional support, that service must remain distinct from LegalEvidence’s independent editorial decision-making.

An assigned legal professional may assist a member in understanding records, organising supporting material, identifying relevant documentation or presenting a documented correction request.

That assistance does not guarantee that LegalEvidence will accept the member’s position or change a publication.

Where LegalEvidence or an affiliated service has a financial or professional relationship with a person or organisation appearing in a record, that relationship must not be permitted to determine the substance of the reporting.

Material conflicts should be identified, disclosed internally and appropriately managed.

Where necessary, individuals involved in a conflicting commercial or professional relationship should be removed from editorial decision-making concerning that matter.

A source, whistleblower, complainant, litigant or other person who supplies information does not acquire ownership of the resulting investigation. Sources cannot require LegalEvidence to:

• adopt their interpretation of events;
• omit material contrary evidence;
• characterise allegations as findings;
• target another person;
• prevent a subject’s response from being considered; or
• dictate the timing or wording of publication.

LegalEvidence evaluates the evidence independently.

A financial contributor, sponsor, member, donor, service provider or commercial partner must not receive authority over individual investigations or editorial conclusions by reason of that financial relationship.

Where a financial relationship creates a material conflict concerning a particular record, LegalEvidence should consider appropriate disclosure, recusal or other safeguards.

Personnel involved in research, investigation, legal review or editorial decision-making should not solicit or accept gifts, benefits, hospitality or favors where acceptance could reasonably compromise — or appear to compromise — their independence concerning a matter.

Attempts to influence reporting through personal benefits should be disclosed internally.

LegalEvidence personnel must not solicit, request, agree to receive or accept improper financial or other advantages in exchange for exercising editorial or investigative functions in a particular manner.

Where circumstances warrant, suspected bribery or improper influence may be documented, escalated internally and referred to appropriate legal counsel or competent authorities.

Applicable anti-bribery laws may include, depending on jurisdiction and circumstances, legislation such as the UK Bribery Act 2010 and relevant U.S. federal and state anti-bribery laws.

Nothing in this policy should be interpreted as asserting that every offer, negotiation or removal request constitutes bribery.

LegalEvidence may receive demands, legal correspondence, commercial pressure, threats of litigation or other objections concerning its reporting.

Every legitimate legal or factual challenge should be considered on its merits. The existence of pressure alone is not a reason either to remove reporting or to retain it.

If a challenge identifies a genuine error, the record should be corrected. If the evidence continues to support the reporting, pressure does not change that evidence.

LegalEvidence does not treat a legal demand as proof that reporting is inaccurate. Likewise, LegalEvidence does not disregard a legal demand merely because it comes from a subject or their counsel.

Legal notices, court orders and other formal demands are assessed according to their substance, applicable law, underlying evidence and LegalEvidence’s legal obligations.

Binding orders of courts and competent authorities are handled in accordance with applicable law.

Journalists, investigators, editors, legal reviewers and other personnel should disclose interests that could reasonably affect their independence concerning a matter. Relevant conflicts may include:

Depending on the circumstances, appropriate safeguards may include recusal, reassignment, independent review or disclosure.

Conflict register

Where practicable, personnel responsible for memberships, subscriptions, partnerships or other commercial activities should not control the editorial outcome of records involving those relationships.

Commercial personnel may communicate factual requests or evidence received from a member or subject to the appropriate editorial team. They may not promise:

No representative of LegalEvidence has authority to make such commitments.

A request for removal, correction or amendment may be considered where it raises legitimate grounds, including:

The identity, wealth, status or membership of the requester does not alter the evidentiary standard applied.

Where appropriate, significant corrections or amendments may be reflected through an update notice or version history.

LegalEvidence should not secretly alter a material factual conclusion merely to satisfy private pressure.

Minor grammatical, formatting or non-substantive changes need not necessarily receive the same treatment.

Suspected attempts by LegalEvidence personnel to sell, trade or improperly influence an editorial outcome should be reported internally and investigated. Depending on the circumstances, violations may result in:

The response should be proportionate to the facts established.