the-recursive-claim/first-draft/appendix-b_annotated-claim-transcripts.md
2025-06-24 19:25:42 -05:00

2.6 KiB
Raw Blame History

Appendix B: Sample Annotated Claim Transcripts

This appendix provides two anonymized insurance claim excerpts.
Each is accompanied by forensic annotations illustrating recursive linguistic signatures,
including denial loops, narrative overcontrol, empathic bypass, and more.


Case 1: Flagged for Narrative Fabrication (Zone III)

Claim Type: Auto Theft
Outcome: Confirmed fraudulent after internal audit


Transcript Excerpt

"So I parked the car around 7:42 PM—at least thats what I remember, maybe 7:45—and went straight inside. I didnt see anything suspicious. I locked it. I always lock it. I never forget. Then, the next morning—about 6:17 AM—I walked out and it was gone. Just gone. I mean, what else couldve happened? The police didnt find any glass, so Im thinking it mustve been towed or something. But I called. They didnt have it. Its crazy."


Annotations

  • Narrative Overcontrol:
    Use of precise, oddly specific timestamps (7:42, 6:17) with hedged certainty ("at least thats what I remember")
  • Denial Looping:
    "I always lock it. I never forget." — repeated unprovoked affirmations of behavior
  • Claimant Displacement:
    "It mustve been towed or something…" shifts responsibility away from the claimant
  • Temporal Drift:
    Ambiguity in overnight timeline; no verification of car status until morning

Case 2: Validated Claim (Zone I)

Claim Type: Property Damage from Storm
Outcome: Paid in full, corroborated by weather and neighbor statements


Transcript Excerpt

"I didnt see the fence until later that afternoon. The wind had picked up fast. I think it was maybe around noon that the gusts really hit. The neighbor said she saw it falling just before 1 PM. I hadnt even gone outside yet—I was still on the phone with work. When I went out, the whole left side was leaning into her yard."


Annotations

  • Temporal Coherence:
    Time sequencing is consistent and corroborated by neighbor testimony
  • Absence of Overjustification:
    No defensive language or excessive rationalization
  • Natural Affective Arc:
    Calm progression of discovery and verification, typical of honest recounting
  • Grounded in Relational Detail:
    Inclusion of third-party perspective strengthens witness alignment

These samples highlight the contrast between deceptive and authentic language structures.
The recursive forensic method does not rely on content alone, but on how truth is encoded—or fractured—in linguistic form.