# Legal-professional interaction truth machine — 2012 onward **Control ID:** PD-LAW-TRUTH-20260922-01 **Parent:** PD-AC-PIA-20260922-01 **Scope:** every project-side lawyer, law firm, procurador and substantive historic professional in `assets/data/legal-professionals-register-v1.json`, across Concurso 36/2012 and matters outside the Concurso. **Starting point:** Garrigues is the first verified firm in the current 2012+ genealogy. Earlier 2011 representation remains an evidence gap and must not be invented. ## Mandatory universe The truth machine must not analyse only the public A1–A8 examples. The controlled universe is **every record** in the legal-professionals register. Inclusion is a traceability classification only and does not imply misconduct, victim status, adverse alignment or causation. ## Genealogy 1. **2012 entry / pre-Concurso restructuring:** Garrigues — Miguel Méndez Itarte, José María Martínez de Artola, Víctor de la Torre García, Zulay Carmen Rodríguez Cabrera. 2. **Concurso continuity and parallel local work:** Juan Tomás Parrilla; Cristo Ayose Suárez Pimentel; project-side procuradores and local criminal/procedural counsel. 3. **2018–2020 finance, exit, litigation and calificación:** Cuatrecasas; Alas Legal; Joaquín Ruiz de Infante; Daniel Irigoyen/DPM role-review; related procuradores/local counsel. 4. **2020 handover / replacement:** Daniel Jiménez / SLJ; Manuel Gallego; DWF-RCD / Rousaud Costas Duran role-review; Luis Miguel López / López Castelo. 5. **2022+ forensic/criminal/document review:** Bernardo del Rosal / DRAS and other verified historic-review professionals. 6. **Current:** Javier Sixto-Seijas, Estefanía Sixto Seijas / Sixto Abogados; Carlos Llamas Sanz; current procuradoras and other current support, always proceeding-specific. Precise names, roles, evidence states and counts are inherited dynamically from `assets/data/legal-professionals-register-v1.json`. Future additions enter this universe unless removed by a source-based correction. ## Unit of analysis Create an interaction envelope for **professional × client × matter × period**. Parallel mandates are allowed. Never infer one envelope from another. Required fields: identity/firm ID; client; matter; inside/outside Concurso; mandate status; dates; client instructions; work actually performed; filings; AC interaction; adverse-party interaction where relevant; information available at the time; fees (source, payer, authority, amount, timing); professional reaction; effect on continuity/independence; formal transition reason; attributed Gil/Patricia allegation; strongest contrary evidence; strongest lawful alternative; causation status; knowledge/intent status; source completeness; open evidence; right-of-reply; publication classification. ## Truth-machine sequence **observe → manifest → compare → classify → traverse dependencies → adversarial review → reconcile → exact-head verify → deploy if applicable → live readback → new envelope → recurse until closure.** - **observe:** native contemporaneous records and custody. - **manifest:** who said/did what, when and in what capacity. - **compare:** instructions, filings, invoices, handovers, court records, later accounts and the professional's explanation. - **classify:** fact, official act, attributed allegation, inference, counterevidence, gap. - **traverse dependencies:** mandate, fees, authority, access, AC/adverse-party interaction, outcome and replacement counsel without transferring responsibility. - **adversarial review:** strongest innocent/professional explanation and contrary chronology. - **reconcile:** names, firms, clients, matters, dates and conflicting sources. - **exact-head verify:** re-check current repository/register heads before mutation or publication. - **deploy/readback:** only when authorised; publish smallest public-safe derivative and verify live. - **recurse:** new contradiction, lawyer, matter, invoice, email, filing or transition reason creates a new envelope. ## Anti-inference rules - Number of lawyer changes is **not evidence** of AC causation. - Withdrawal is not proof the AC caused withdrawal. - Payment is not proof of bribery or improper inducement. - Contact is not proof of influence. - A lawyer's later disagreement with the client is not proof earlier allegations were false. - A lawyer's earlier agreement is not proof later misconduct. - A procedural route/adverse ruling is not proof of criminal purpose. - Similar mechanisms may be compared, but motive, knowledge, legality and causation remain event-specific. - Garrigues remains in the genealogy although no AC causal link is presently alleged. - Current counsel are included for continuity/audit, not retrospectively forced into a former-counsel attrition thesis. ## Public/private boundary Public Git receives public-safe proposition summaries, source categories, opaque IDs and controlled routes only. Native Gmail bodies, provider IDs, private Drive locators, privileged advice, personal data, unredacted invoices and live strategy remain in authorised private custody. ## Controlling inputs - `assets/data/legal-professionals-register-v1.json` - `assets/data/legal-representation-v1.json` - `assets/data/legal-representation-ac-causation-v1.json` - `archive/LEGAL_REPRESENTATION_LEDGER_19AUG2026.md` - `archive/LEGAL_REPRESENTATION_AC_INTERFERENCE_CAUSATION_AUDIT_19AUG2026.md` - `archive/AC_PROFESSIONAL_ISOLATION_ATTRITION_CANON_22SEP2026.md` - `archive/COUNSEL_DEFENCE_CONTINUITY_SOURCE_MAP_23AUG2026.md` This control is additive and source-first. It does not authorise external contact, filing or email. ## AC-linked interaction rule Where an interaction envelope concerns an act, omission, payment, access decision, professional-exposure event or other conduct attributed to the Administrador Concursal, bind the professional envelope to **PD-AC-CLAIMS-R33-20260922-01** and the most specific `AC-CLM-*` family in `assets/data/ac-claims-r33-crosswalk-v1.json`. Professional analysis and AC-claim analysis are complementary, not substitutes: the former asks what happened to the professional mandate; the latter asks what exact AC act/omission, duty, knowledge, effect, counterevidence and open proof are alleged. The professional-isolation theory is specifically `AC-CLM-011`. Do not use that family as a catch-all for unrelated AC allegations. ## Canonical counsel-incident binding — 26 September 2026 The Truth Machine now binds every material counsel-continuity event to `PD-SP-COUNSEL-INCIDENT-REGISTRY-001` and a distinct immutable `PD-CIR-*` incident reference. A professional × client × matter envelope can contain multiple incidents; firm-level and person-level incidents may coexist. Do not merge incidents solely because the same professional, law firm, AC, adverse actor, court or proceeding recurs. Create or update a `PD-CIR-*` record whenever the source set shows a material payment/proposed payment, fee recognition/assignment, mandate displacement, Bar/disciplinary route, personal professional exposure linked to a pleading, AC/adverse-party contact, filing condition/refusal, handover/file-access or confidentiality event, or a withdrawal for which interference is alleged. Every incident must preserve contrary evidence, lawful alternatives and negative searches. Current seed register: `assets/data/former-counsel-incident-register-v1.json`. Human control: `governance/FORMER_COUNSEL_INCIDENT_REGISTER_26SEP2026.md`. Luis A. Barber Marrero is now bound to `PD-CIR-LUISBARBER-2019-01`: the source set verifies substantive ALAS collaboration and ALAS client billing involving Barber, while internal collaborator economics and any later file/receivable transfer remain open. Current professional-platform continuity is not juridical succession. No external contact is authorised by this binding.