Subject Rights

LegalEvidence distinguishes between allegations, investigations, charges, proceedings, findings, convictions, dismissals, acquittals and reversals.

A person accused, charged, sued or investigated is not presented as guilty merely because proceedings exist.

Where no final determination has been made, that status should be clearly identified.

Before publication of material adverse reporting, LegalEvidence ordinarily seeks comment from the person or entity concerned where reasonably practicable and appropriate.

The request should provide sufficient information for the subject to understand the substance of the matters on which a response is sought.

Relevant responses and supporting documentation are considered before publication.

Failure to respond is not treated as an admission or evidence of wrongdoing.

A subject may provide documents or other evidence relevant to a record, including:

Evidence supplied by a subject is assessed under the same verification standards applied to other sources.

A subject may identify a factual statement they believe is inaccurate, incomplete or materially misleading and request review. A request should identify:

• the publication;
• the statement challenged;
• the reason it is disputed; and
• the evidence supporting the challenge.

LegalEvidence may independently verify the material before determining whether correction, clarification, amendment or another action is appropriate.

LegalEvidence considers material developments that affect the meaning of a record. Where verified and relevant, these may include:

Where later events materially change the status of earlier reporting, the record should be reviewed and updated appropriately.

Statements contained in complaints, indictments, lawsuits, interviews or other sources should not be represented as established findings merely because they appear in formal documents.

Where attribution is necessary to understand the status of a claim, LegalEvidence identifies who made the allegation or determination.

A subject has the right to challenge materially inaccurate attribution.

LegalEvidence takes reasonable steps to distinguish individuals and entities with similar or identical names.

Where a subject believes information has been incorrectly attributed because of mistaken identity, they should notify LegalEvidence promptly and provide identifying information sufficient to resolve the issue.

Confirmed mistaken identity should be treated as a priority correction matter.

LegalEvidence may hold information that is not appropriate for public disclosure.

Personal information should be published only where its inclusion is relevant, proportionate, legally supportable and justified by the circumstances. Particular care may apply to:

The mere availability of information online does not automatically justify republication.

Where applicable data-protection law provides rights concerning personal information, LegalEvidence considers properly submitted requests in accordance with the law governing the relevant processing.

Depending on jurisdiction and circumstances, such rights may concern access, accuracy, correction, objection, restriction, erasure or other treatment of personal data.

Those rights may be subject to exemptions or limitations, including those applicable to journalism, freedom of expression, legal claims, public records and matters of public interest.

LegalEvidence does not represent that every requested data-protection remedy applies to every publication.

A subject may ask LegalEvidence to remove or restrict material. Such requests are considered on their legal and evidentiary merits. Potential grounds may include:

Reputational inconvenience alone does not necessarily require removal of accurate, lawful and public-interest reporting.

LegalEvidence does not charge subjects to:

• Submit a response
• Challenge factual accuracy
• Provide evidence
• Request a correction
• Request review of an evidentiary classification
• Request removal or restriction

Research Membership is separate from these rights.

Payment, membership, status or influence does not determine the outcome of a subject request.

A subject may communicate through legal counsel or another properly authorised representative.

LegalEvidence may request reasonable evidence of authority before disclosing non-public information or processing certain requests on another person’s behalf.

The involvement of legal counsel does not prejudice the subject, nor does it automatically require LegalEvidence to accept the position advanced.

A subject may request confidential treatment of material provided during a response or correction process.

LegalEvidence will consider such requests in light of applicable law, source obligations, editorial requirements and the public interest.

Confidentiality should not be promised absolutely unless LegalEvidence is legally and operationally capable of providing it.

LegalEvidence does not apply a lower standard to adverse evidence and a higher standard to exculpatory evidence.

Verified material showing that allegations were unfounded, proceedings were dismissed, a person was acquitted, a finding was overturned or an attribution was incorrect should be considered with appropriate seriousness.

Our purpose is not to preserve an adverse narrative. Our purpose is to preserve an accurate record.

LegalEvidence recognises that publication may affect how a subject appears in search engines and other third-party systems.

Search visibility does not determine whether accurate public-interest information should remain published.

However, where the underlying record has materially changed, LegalEvidence should ensure its own title, summary, metadata and published content do not continue to communicate an outdated or materially misleading status.

LegalEvidence does not control independent search engines or third-party republication.

LegalEvidence uses evidentiary classifications to identify the status of material matters.

A subject may request review where they believe a classification no longer accurately reflects the underlying legal or evidentiary position.

Classifications are changed when the evidence warrants a change — not as part of a commercial arrangement.

A person who believes a LegalEvidence journalist, investigator, researcher or representative engaged in improper conduct may submit a complaint. Complaints may concern matters including:

Complaints should identify the conduct concerned and provide supporting information where available.

LegalEvidence should not publish adverse material merely because a subject:

• disputes reporting;
• requests correction;
• retains legal counsel;
• refuses an interview;
• declines to comment;
• exercises a data-protection right;
• requests removal; or
• makes a good-faith complaint.

Such conduct does not establish wrongdoing.

Subject rights operate within applicable law and do not necessarily provide a right to control independent public-interest reporting.

LegalEvidence may, where legally permitted, decline requests that would require it to:

• state something unsupported by evidence;
• conceal material public-interest information;
• disclose a protected source;
• disclose privileged or confidential material;
• interfere with another person’s rights;
• disregard an applicable legal obligation; or
• alter an accurate record without sufficient grounds.

Any applicable statutory rights remain subject to the law governing the particular request.

LegalEvidence operates in a cross-border environment.

For matters governed by UK law, relevant considerations may arise under the UK GDPR, Data Protection Act 2018, Defamation Act 2013, human-rights principles concerning privacy and freedom of expression, and applicable court-reporting rules.

In the United States, rights and protections may arise under the First Amendment, state defamation and privacy law, public-record laws and other applicable federal or state provisions.

Matters involving Asian jurisdictions are considered under the laws of the specific jurisdiction concerned. LegalEvidence does not treat Asia as a single legal system.