What Is a Forensic Case Package? A Plain-English Explainer
This one is written for the attorney or paralegal side of a case rather than the self-represented litigant side. "Case package" gets used loosely in litigation to mean different bundles of documents depending on who's saying it. Here's what it means as a deliverable, and — more specifically — what Verity's Pro portal actually assembles when it builds one from a parsed text conversation.
The concept: a case package as a deliverable
At its most general, a "case package" is the bundle of documents an attorney puts together around a piece of evidence before it's usable in a filing or handed to opposing counsel — a cover sheet explaining what's in the bundle, an index of the exhibits it contains, the evidence itself in exhibit form, and whatever supporting documentation backs it up. The exact contents vary by case and by what the evidence is. For a text-message conversation specifically, that usually breaks down into two different needs at once: the conversation itself, presented as something that can be marked and offered as an exhibit, and an analytical work product — a report identifying what's significant in it — that counsel uses to actually work the case. Assembling both by hand, from a raw export, is real work: paginating a long thread cleanly, numbering it, flagging silent stretches, and writing up the patterns worth arguing.
What Verity's Pro portal actually builds
From the report screen in the Pro portal, generating a case package produces one merged PDF built out of three pieces:
- A cover page. States the client/matter name, the message count, an estimate of how long the thread would take to read by hand, and a plain-language explanation of what the two parts below are — and, just as importantly, what each one is not — so whoever opens the file understands its structure before reading further.
- Part A — the complete conversation exhibit. A chronological, sequentially numbered printout of the entire parsed thread: date, time, sender, and message text for every message, in order. No pattern labels and no health score appear here — that analysis lives only in Part B, deliberately kept separate from the plain factual record. Gaps of seven or more days between messages are automatically flagged in place, so a silent stretch is visible rather than just an unremarked jump in the timeline. Timestamps are shown in the computer's time zone at the moment the PDF is generated, and the exhibit says so on its own page rather than leaving that assumption unstated. A short declaration page follows — a fill-in-the-blank statement for the person with knowledge of the conversation to sign, identifying the device or account it was exported from and confirming the printout fairly represents it. The tool describes this itself as a convenience form: it does not make the exhibit self-authenticating on its own, and the printout is explicit that it is not a device forensic image. A person with knowledge still has to testify to it. Because a court or clerk may want the exhibit as its own standalone file rather than bundled into the larger package, Part A can also be downloaded separately from the case screen.
- Part B — the forensic pattern report. Verity's existing white-labeled forensic PDF — patterns, flagged quotes, and scoring, carrying the firm's own branding rather than Verity's. The package frames this piece as counsel's working copy and supporting documentation, not as expert testimony or a substitute for a qualified witness.
The three pieces are merged into a single PDF automatically, so what the portal hands back is one file rather than three separate downloads to reassemble by hand.
Two things worth being precise about
First: the sequential numbers printed on each message in Part A are exhibit numbering internal to the printout, not page-level Bates numbers. Applying Bates numbers across a document production is a separate step, typically done with PDF production software once the exhibit is finalized — our guide to hash-verified, Bates-numbered exhibit packets covers that mechanically, along with what a hash value is and how to generate one — we won't repeat that here. Worth noting: the case package's cover and exhibit pages do include a SHA-256 hash of the exhibit printout itself, computed automatically and printed on the exhibit's first page, which is the same fingerprinting concept that post explains in more depth.
Second: the declaration page is a form to be printed, signed by hand, and returned — the portal doesn't collect an electronic signature or notarize anything itself. If a case needs the underlying conversation redacted before it's shared — a phone number, a child's name, an address — that's a separate, existing capability in the same pipeline: specific terms can be blacked out across the exhibit before it's generated, and the exhibit can optionally carry a watermark (left off by default on the version meant to actually be filed, so it isn't stamped over the record itself).
To be explicit about scope: this is a description of what the Pro portal's case package feature builds today, not a claim that it replaces legal judgment about what a specific court or case actually requires for a filing. That's general information, not legal advice — talk to the attorney of record about what your jurisdiction and case need. Verity Pro is the attorney-facing subscription this feature lives in — a 7-day trial is available for firms that want to see it against a real case file.
See it against a real conversation
Verity Pro is a $299/mo subscription with a 7-day trial — white-label reports, case management, and the case package builder described above.
Explore Verity Pro →