A pathologist signs their name at the bottom of every autopsy report. That signature carries weight. If software helped draft any part of the document, you should be able to walk a prosecutor, a family liaison, or a judge through exactly what it did and what it did not do.
That bar is not unreasonable. It is the same bar you already hold yourself to. The problem is that most AI tools entering this space were built for someone else's workflow entirely.
None of this argues against using software to ease documentation. Reasonable tools can help capture and organize what an examiner already knows. But the examination, the interpretation of findings, and the cause and manner on a signed report rest with the pathologist who puts their name on it. Software can assist with the record. It does not perform the autopsy or substitute for the professional judgment behind the signature. Any tool worth adopting should keep that line clear.
Demos look nothing like Tuesday morning
Vendor demos are polished. A clean microphone, a straightforward case, and a room full of people who have time to watch. Most medical examiner offices never operate that way. You might have half a dozen cases open, a deputy stretched across two jurisdictions, legacy templates that do not match the brochure, and a preliminary report a family has been waiting on far too long.
So the real evaluation question is simpler than most pitch decks make it sound: will this hold up on your worst week, with your templates, signed by your pathologist?
Where did this sentence come from?
Say AI produces a paragraph on cardiac findings. Before that language goes anywhere near a final report, you need to know its origin. Did it come from your dictation? From an earlier section you already approved? Or did the software fill in a gap on its own?
That distinction matters. An autopsy report is a legal and medical record, not a draft that sounds polished. Every line should be something you can inspect, edit, and defend. Software that makes your original words harder to find, or quietly adds language you never spoke, creates more work and more risk than it removes.
If you cannot trace a sentence back to your own observations, it does not belong in a report you are about to sign.
A quiet afternoon tells you very little
Most tools look fine when caseload is light and the pathologist already knows the template by heart. The harder test comes later: a backlog, an unfamiliar trauma pattern, a new examiner still learning the office's phrasing, a deputy finishing documentation at the end of a long shift.
General dictation software is built to produce smooth sentences. Forensic documentation needs something different. It needs to preserve clinical precision, follow your office's format, and stop when it is unsure rather than guess and move on. Fluency is easy. Fidelity is the hard part.
Ask any vendor to show you a complicated week, not a showcase case. The gap between those two demos will tell you most of what you need to know.
Your case files
Death investigation sits in an uncomfortable middle ground. The records are medical. The implications are legal. The details are deeply personal to grieving families. HIPAA still applies, even when the setting feels nothing like a hospital ward.
When you evaluate a vendor, you should get plain answers to plain questions. Who can see your case files? Where is the data stored? How long is it kept? Does your office's data stay yours, used only for your work, and nowhere else? A vendor that cannot answer those questions clearly is not ready for this field.
Why we built Locarda
Locarda was built for offices that cannot afford guesswork in their reports. It is designed around how forensic teams actually dictate, review, and sign off on findings. You stay in control of what goes into the document. Nothing is added without your review. Your case information stays in your workflow.
We are still early in what forensic AI can responsibly do. But the direction is clear: software that fits how your office already works, answers your questions without jargon, and earns confidence case by case rather than asking for it upfront.
More vendors will keep showing up with slick demos. The offices that choose well will be the ones that ask practical questions and refuse to lower the standard they already hold for every signed report.
Curious whether Locarda fits how your office works? Try Locarda, see how Dr. Pandey uses it, or email founders@locarda.com.
See how Locarda handles forensic documentation
Built for medical examiners and forensic pathologists who need accuracy, control, and security.
See how Dr. Pandey uses LocardaQuestions? Email founders@locarda.com