Fictional matter · all names invented
In the matter of the Estate of Cornelius Albury Thane, deceased
Contentious probate. Six documents. Nothing here is real. Press 1–6 to jump.
1 · Will, 12 March 2019
I, CORNELIUS ALBURY THANE of Lyford Cay, New Providence, revoke all former wills. I appoint my daughter MIRABEL THANE-ROLLE sole executrix. I give my residence at Lyford Cay to Mirabel absolutely. I give my shareholding in Thane Marine Supplies Ltd equally to Mirabel and my son DESMOND THANE. The residue of my estate I give to the trustees of the Albury Family Settlement (2011) to hold on its trusts. Signed in the presence of two witnesses, Nassau.2 · Codicil, 4 September 2023 (executed at Sunrise Care Residence)
I confirm my will of 12 March 2019 save that I revoke the gift of my shareholding in Thane Marine Supplies Ltd and give the whole of it to my daughter Mirabel absolutely. Witnesses: E. Ferguson (care assistant), L. Pinder (administrator).3 · Letter from Dr A. Moxey, GP, 2 February 2023
Mr Thane attended today with his daughter. He was oriented to person and place; he was uncertain of the date. Short-term recall was poor. He expressed clear views about his family. I have advised a review in three months and referred him for a memory assessment.4 · Letter from Coral Harbour Bank, 15 April 2025
Further to the death of Mr Thane on 3 March 2025, the brokerage account (ending 4471) stood at B$1,842,600 at the date of death. No transactions have been processed since. We await the grant.5 · Email chain, Desmond Thane to Mirabel Thane-Rolle, 18 January – 9 April 2025
18 Jan: "Dad doesn't remember signing anything in 2023. Who arranged that?" — 2 Mar: "I want to see the codicil." — 9 Apr: "I've instructed counsel. The company shares were always meant to be shared."6 · Caveat, filed 22 April 2025
Desmond Thane, son of the deceased, enters a caveat against any grant in respect of the will of 12 March 2019 and codicil of 4 September 2023 on the grounds of want of testamentary capacity and undue influence as to the codicil.Demo A · 0:00–3:00 · Procedural Documents — Permitted
The good
What I asked it — Tuesday
From the six documents, produce a dated chronology of events relevant to the validity of the 2023 codicil, one line per event, oldest first, citing the source document for each line. Do not infer events not stated in the documents.
Recorded · date not setNo recording loaded — Prep tab.
Then one more — the transactional flash
From the same six documents, draft a short letter to the executrix summarising the position and the next three steps, in plain English.
Recorded · date not setNo recording loaded — Prep tab.
Say
"I ran these on Tuesday and recorded every keystroke — you're watching exactly what happened, at the speed it happened."
"Six documents, one instruction: chronology, sourced, no inference. Fifteen lines, each with its source — because I told it to cite. Under Appendix A: Procedural Documents, Permitted. And even this, if filed, carries the certificate."
"Same tool, one more prompt — a first-draft letter from facts you supplied. That's the daily use for most of this firm. You read it, you own it, it never went near a court."
Reflection beatProcedural Documents — Permitted; certify if filed. The letter — not court work at all.
Demo B · 3:00–7:30 · the failure moved · never cut
The trap
Three beats. 1 — it refuses to invent (45 sec). 2 — with search on, it looks authoritative (60 sec). 3 — three things to check, checked live (2 min). Hard stop 7:30.
Beat 1 · I asked it to name Bahamian authorities — from memory
Answer from your own knowledge only. Do not search the web. What Bahamian authorities establish the test for testamentary capacity where a codicil is executed in a care home? Give case names, citations, and the court.
Recorded · date not setNo recording loaded — Prep tab.
"It refused to invent them — and told me why. That is genuinely better than 2025, and I am not going to pretend otherwise. Good. Now watch what happens when I let it search."
Beat 2 · then I let it search
Recorded · date not setNo recording loaded — Prep tab.
"Real cases. Real links. A table, a burden-of-proof framework, a reasoned answer. This is the version most of you would actually use."
Beat 3 · three things a verifying lawyer would check — and we check them, live
- A report citation on a case a leading practitioner guide describes as unreported. It gives Rolle v Ferguson "[2013] 2 BHS J No 12". Which is right? We look.
- A secondary source cited as if it were the primary. The link on that row is Coakley v Deshanks — a later judgment that applies Rolle. Fair place to read about it; not the case itself.
- One authority with no source at all. Every other row carries a link. The Ervin Knowles row carries none. So we search for it — now.
- Search the unsourced case. Narrate the result, whatever it is.
- Found: "there it is — and that is exactly what checking does. You don't know until you look."
- Not found: "and that is the one that would have reached a filing."
"Nothing was invented. Everything is plausible. So which is harder to catch at six in the evening — a case that does not exist, or a citation that is subtly wrong on a case that does? The failure moved from fabrication to attribution. That is why section 10 says every citation must exist and be accurate — and the second half is now the half that matters."
Recorded · date not set · fallbackOptional: paste Tuesday's search result, in case the room has no connection.
Nothing on this screen is a verdict. The room watches the check happen. Run the names through the firm's database on Friday morning anyway — so nothing surprises you — but the beat no longer depends on any answer.
Reflection beatThat was the s 10 duty — exists, and accurate — and why the certificate says "all legal authorities have been verified."
Demo C · 7:30–10:00 · s 8 · compressible to 90 seconds
The line
On screen
Show the bundle — document 1, the will, and the Albury Family Settlement. Nothing is pasted anywhere.
"This does not go into a public tool. Not the deed, not a client name, not the matter facts."
"Section 8's own logic: prompts may be added to the model and surface for other users — unless that is disabled. That word is the whole difference between a public tool and a secured deployment: retention off, training off, in writing. That is what an approved tool means."
No vendor named. No product endorsed. If the clock is against you: two sentences.
Reflection beat · and the bridgeThat was s 8. And notice — for the trust deed there is no row on the grid at all. Which brings us to what this means at your desk.
Then
Back to the deck → slide 7 "What this means at your desk".
Prep · Tuesday, after the rehearsal · saved in this browser only
Load the recordings
The four runs from 6 September are already loaded — the tabs work as they are. Edit only if you re-record, or to fix the date.
Recording date — shown on every replay, always
A1 · the chronology — paste the model's output verbatim
A2 · the letter — verbatim
B1 · the refusal (browsing off) — verbatim
B2 · the searched answer (browsing on) — verbatim, untouched
Verification fallback (optional) — what the database returned
Firm database link (optional)
How to record — Tuesday, 20 minutes
- Open any leading consumer model, fresh session, browsing off.
- Paste the bundle + prompt A1. Copy the output into A1 above, verbatim.
- Prompt A2. Copy into A2.
- Prompt B with browsing OFF ("answer from your own knowledge only"). Copy the reply into B1 — the refusal is the first beat.
- Prompt B again in a NEW chat with browsing ON. Copy into B2 exactly — do not tidy it; the authority of its formatting is the point.
- Search courts.bs for the party names and the citation. Note the result in the fallback box.
- Enter the date and time. Save. Reload the page and press Play on each tab.
Two rules. The tag says RECORDED with the date on every replay — the design will not let a recording masquerade as live. And nothing is edited: the model's refusal and its searched answer both go in exactly as they came. The point is no longer that it invents — it is that the failure moved from fabrication to attribution.
Friday, before 10:00
- Clean desktop: this page, the deck, one browser tab for courts.bs. Nothing else.
- Teams: share the window, not the desktop.
- Browser zoom 150%. Read a replay from the back row.
- Press Play on A1, A2, B once. Load the fallback.
- Names checked against the Bar directory and the judgments list.
Keys
Space clock · R reset · A B C tabs · 0 bundle · 1–6 document · P play the current tab's first recording