---
title: "Build an authenticity checklist for a key digital exhibit"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/obligations/incoming-evidence-deepfakes-and-synthetic-documents/build-an-authenticity-checklist-for-a-key-digital-exhibit"
type: "task"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A44-T1-R1"
practice_area: "Incoming evidence — deepfakes & synthetic documents"
tier: "red"
lawyer_review: "required"
last_reviewed: "2026-09-23"
---

# Build an authenticity checklist for a key digital exhibit

> From the file, list source, capture date, metadata fields, hash if supplied and gaps against the authenticity questions the lawyer has named.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/obligations/incoming-evidence-deepfakes-and-synthetic-documents/build-an-authenticity-checklist-for-a-key-digital-exhibit  
Last reviewed: 2026-09-23

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Incoming evidence — deepfakes & synthetic documents](https://ailawframework.com/obligations/incoming-evidence-deepfakes-and-synthetic-documents.md) |
| Human involvement | Red: Lawyer writes; AI may check, clarify or collect data |
| How AI is used | From the file, list source, capture date, metadata fields, hash if supplied and gaps against the authenticity questions the lawyer has named. |
| What the lawyer must review | Authenticate through source and chain of custody, using a forensic examiner where needed Do not rely on a tool's 'this looks real' score |
| Written for / versions | 2 jurisdiction versions below |

## Checking plan

**Lawyer review required**

The responsible lawyer reviews the work against the instructions, sources and intended use.

- What the AI does: Define the proposed assistance and confirm its permitted scope before using an AI tool.
- What the lawyer does: Set the scope, verify the evidence, resolve exceptions and approve the final output for its intended use.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Suggested checking approach based on the task guidance. Complete the assessment for the actual tool, information and jurisdiction.
- Why: The plan reflects the described work and review requirements. Policy colours are not used to determine permission or checking.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Preserve original files and relevant metadata. Document provenance and handling, and seek forensic review where authenticity needs to be resolved.
2. Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
3. Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.

## Notes

- Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts. The checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.

## Jurisdiction versions

| Jurisdiction | Level |
| --- | --- |
| [United States](https://ailawframework.com/obligations/incoming-evidence-deepfakes-and-synthetic-documents/build-an-authenticity-checklist-for-a-key-digital-exhibit/united-states.md) | Red |
| [New Zealand](https://ailawframework.com/obligations/incoming-evidence-deepfakes-and-synthetic-documents/build-an-authenticity-checklist-for-a-key-digital-exhibit/new-zealand.md) | Red |

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*