Which specific third-party allegations in the files have been corroborated by independent evidence or legal filings?

1. What the user is actually asking and the evidentiary limit of the record

The user seeks a concrete inventory—named allegations from "the files" that have independent corroboration or been backed by legal filings—but the documents provided are treatises and rules about corroboration, hearsay, and evidentiary practice rather than case‑specific reporting or filings identifying particular third‑party claims and their corroboration; therefore the available record cannot produce the requested list of corroborated allegations ^{[4] [5]}.

2. How courts and practitioners define "corroboration"—the yardstick reporters and lawyers use

Corroboration, as summarized in practice guides and legal dictionaries, means confirmation or independent support by additional evidence and can include physical evidence, eyewitness testimony, business records, photographs, and machine‑generated data—each of which may independently confirm a third party’s statement if properly authenticated and admitted ^{[1] [3] [2]}.

3. Types of independent evidence courts typically accept as corroboration

The sources emphasize that corroboration often takes the form of independent witnesses or physical proof (e.g., ballistics matching a gun cited by a witness), business or machine records incorporated into a party’s files, medical evidence consistent with an account, or other documentation adopted as a party’s own—each category has procedural and foundational rules before it becomes admissible corroboration ^{[1] [2] [6]}.

4. Special statutory or doctrinal corroboration rules that matter for third‑party allegations

Some crimes and jurisdictions still impose restrictions or special corroboration rules—for example, Massachusetts requires independent evidence for certain long‑delayed child‑rape indictments beyond expert opinion, and accomplice testimony often demands corroboration independent of other accomplices’ statements—meaning a third‑party allegation in those contexts must be matched to evidence that specifically relates to the alleged act ^{[7] [8]}.

5. Limits: what is not corroboration and why some third‑party statements remain unconfirmed

Legal materials caution that recent complaints by victims or one declarant’s prior statements are not always "independent" corroboration; similarly, hearsay rules, adoption, and context matter—machine data is not hearsay but still requires foundation; prior identifications may be treated differently by states—so a third‑party allegation supported only by another person’s statement or by unqualified prior complaints may still fail to meet legal corroboration standards ^{[9] [5] [2]}.

6. How to evaluate whether a given third‑party allegation in a file is corroborated (practical checklist based on sources)

A usable test drawn from the sources is: does the evidence exist outside the declarant’s own words (independent witness, physical or machine record, medical proof, business document), is it tied to the specific act alleged, and has it been authenticated or introduced in legal filings or court proceedings—if yes, it tends to qualify as corroboration; if not, the allegation remains uncorroborated under standard rules ^{[1] [7] [6]}.

7. Conclusion and honest admission of the record’s gap

The supplied materials equip a reader to judge whether third‑party allegations could be corroborated, but they do not themselves corroborate any specific allegations from unidentified "files"; absent named allegations and case filings, the reporting cannot produce the concrete list requested and any assertion of corroboration would require consulting particular court records, authenticated documents, or prosecutorial filings that are not present in these sources ^{[4] [10]}.