How the record is built
Methodology.
The Peter Files is a public, source-linked review of the claims in Reckless Ben’s video ES82FWeOnU4 about Ideal Living and related people and entities. It is a record, not a truth machine and not a judgment.
Evidence categories
Every statement in the record is labeled with what it is:
- Court or official finding — a judgment, order, or official record reviewed directly.
- First-party statement — what a company or person says about itself.
- Attributed reporting — a news report about an underlying record or event, labeled by source.
- Analysis or inference — this project’s reasoning, clearly marked.
- Unknown, unsupported, or contradicted — claims the reviewed record did not establish, or that conflict with it.
The rules
- Association is not complicity.
- A complaint or affidavit contains allegations; it is not a merits judgment.
- A dismissal or settlement is not automatically a win on the facts.
- Silence, refusal, or hostility is not an admission.
- Names, quotations, dates, and case numbers are verified against the original source.
- A source’s words are separated from this project’s analysis.
- Counterevidence and plausible alternative explanations are preserved.
Source preference
Court, government, and first-party records come first. Mirrors of public records and news reports are labeled by type and cannot silently stand in for the original. Every assessment records the date it was reviewed. Where an important record has not been reviewed, that gap is stated — it is never filled with inference.
Human review
AI tools may help organize records, compare versions, and draft wording. A human reviews every published factual statement and every citation before publication. No source, quotation, or certainty is invented. The baseline for the 17-claim ledger is dated .
Corrections
When a statement is shown to be wrong or misleading, it is corrected visibly on the corrections page with a dated entry, rather than silently rewritten.