Investigative Case Management Requirements
Find the answer where the question is.
A detective reading a witness statement spots a license plate and wonders, “Where else have we seen this plate?” In Hubstream, they can follow the plate directly to other reports that mention it, without leaving the statement to start a separate search.
Schedule a walkthrough →A commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) investigative case management system gives an agency a configurable electronic case file from referral through closure. The requirements are familiar: log the case, assign leads, preserve evidence, review findings, and document the outcome. What changes is how quickly someone can put new information in context and decide what to do.
One lead, two ways to investigate
County B reports a cargo theft. A witness saw a white box truck with a plate ending in 555. Could another county’s report help identify it? Step through each workflow below at your own pace.
Start with the case file.
The incoming report is no longer on screen.
Find the witness statement in the case file.
Compare the two accounts from notes or by switching back and forth between the cases.
Start with the common identifier. Click the highlighted 555 in the statement to begin.
Only the shared characters are highlighted. The incoming report stays in view.
Both witnesses describe a white box truck. County A’s witness recorded 1FAKE555. County B’s witness saw only the ending 555. The descriptions are consistent, but the reports alone cannot establish that it was the same truck.
Read the full scenario as text
Traditional case management workflow
- The incoming County B statement (CB-26-1187) reads: “I saw a white box truck. I could read only the last three plate characters: 555.”
- Open search and enter the plate ending 555.
- Open the matching County A case (CA-26-0412) and find the witness statement: “I saw a white box truck with plate 1FAKE555.”
- Return to the incoming report to compare the two accounts.
How it works in Hubstream
- Select 555 in the incoming County B statement.
- County A’s statement opens beside it, with only the shared characters 555 highlighted.
- Choose “Compare accounts.” The AI summary reads: Both witnesses describe a white box truck. County A’s witness recorded 1FAKE555. County B’s witness saw only the ending 555. The descriptions are consistent, but the reports alone cannot establish that it was the same truck. Both source statements are linked.
- Choose “Assign follow-up”: request County B’s loading-dock footage to check the remaining characters, with both reports linked to the assignment.
Conceptual comparison using fictional records. Individual systems vary.
For a deeper walkthrough of comparing records and preparing a weekly bulletin, see Investigative Workflows.
What should your team be able to do?
Choose a role, take the action, and watch the workspace change.
Try it: Pull every report on a person, then add his alias as a synonym to find one that never uses his name.
Start with the person. Click the highlighted John Mercer to pull every report that mentions him.
A field interview recorded his nickname. Next, click the highlighted Johnie Apple to record it as a synonym, so searches for him include it.
The robbery report never mentions John Mercer. Next, click the highlighted link analysis to see the connection.
Try it: Switch two sightings from a map to a timeline, then inspect one.
Start with the map. Click the highlighted timeline to see the same sightings in time order.
County A · CA-26-0412
Next, click the highlighted County B sighting to read the account behind it.
County A · CA-26-0412BWed · 11:40 PM
County B · CB-26-1187
Try it: Select the cargo-theft count and open County B’s case.
Start with the dashboard. Click the highlighted 12 to see the cargo-theft cases behind the count.
Next, click the highlighted County B case to see its follow-ups.
Try it: Switch between two role previews of the same tip.
Start with the investigator’s view. Click the highlighted authorized supervisor to preview the same tip in that role.
Conceptual illustration using fictional records. Individual systems vary.
Core requirements at a glance
Compare requirements by role
Choose a role to compare its core requirements in a traditional workflow and in Hubstream.
Investigators
When a tip comes in, what does it add to an open case, and who needs to act?
Crime analysts
Is this a pattern or a coincidence?
Leadership
What changed, and where does my team need to act?
Law enforcement IT
Can we adapt the system, protect sensitive records, and keep the tools we use?
Procurement questions
Can we keep our existing CAD and RMS?
Yes. Your agency can keep its computer-aided dispatch system for dispatch and its records management system for official records. Hubstream supports the investigation that follows. The information exchanged depends on the integration scoped for your agency.
What can users change themselves?
Users can adjust their views within agency policy. Authorized staff can configure fields, forms, and approval routes without writing code. During a walkthrough, try changing a view as an investigator and changing a field as an administrator.
What can our security team review?
Hubstream is hosted on Microsoft Azure. Your team can request Hubstream’s SOC 2 Type II report and review the environment and controls proposed for your deployment. Use a restricted case to test what each role can see.
How will we verify migration and integration scope?
Identify the source systems, attachments, relationships, and interfaces your agency needs. Ask for implementation and integration services to be itemized. Use a sample case to verify the migrated records, a correction from a connected system, and the contents of an export.
See how your team would work a case
Bring a task your team handles every week. We’ll follow it from the first report to the decision your team needs to make.