KEY EVIDENCE • EXHIBIT INDEX

EXHIBITS ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE

These exhibits are presented as linked records for the jury (the reader). Exhibit A is foundational and may be referenced throughout the record.

🔒 INDEX — ALL ENTRIES BELOW HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY THE COURT AND ADMITTED INTO THE EVIDENCE
A Exhibit A
A FOUNDATIONAL

Exhibit A — Aligned Numbers/Dates People and Events

After the Sandy Hook tragedy, the plaintiff/author discovered the founding dates for the prophetic lottery numbers reoccurred throughout American history and culture in unusual and profound ways to support our key question to you the jury:

If approached with humility and restraint, can these patterns—offered only as attention markers—interrupt fear, grief, or despair and invite the deliberate choice of love?

If so, Sharing The Great Invitation is caring!

F EXHIBIT

Exhibit F — Historical Interruption of Violence

Christmas Truce of World War I (1914): In December 1914, soldiers along parts of the Western Front spontaneously ceased fighting to observe Christmas, emerging from trenches to exchange greetings, share food, sing carols, and bury their dead together. The truce was informal, unsanctioned, and short-lived, yet it demonstrated how shared symbolic attention to a sacred moment could interrupt violence without orders, treaties, or force—serving as a historical example of moral choice overriding despair and dehumanization, even if only briefly.

Reader instruction: You may begin with any exhibit. If you want the record’s spine first, begin with Exhibit A.
EXHIBIT INDEX

Coincidence vs Structure

The claim is not causation. The question is whether the pattern shows disciplined, stable coherence that resists dismissal as chance.

Coincidence

What “random + searching” often produces:

  • Matches appear mainly after outcomes are known
  • Rules shift to preserve the hit
  • Scope expands until something fits
  • Many exceptions; few constraints
  • A collage of hits, not a system

Structure

What “constraint-like coherence” looks like:

  • Numbers are anchored in independent facts (dates, artifacts, records)
  • Rules remain stable across cases
  • Scope is defined in advance (where you will look / won’t look)
  • Coherence persists across independent domains
  • Fewer arbitrary choices explain more (“compression”)

Replication Test (Disciplined Challenge)

  1. Start with your life: choose five numbers anchored in significant personal dates (births, marriages, losses, events). Test against an established symbolic framework without forcing fit.
  2. Reverse direction: start with symbolic numbers, then pick five numbers anchored in significant personal dates (births, marriages, losses, events).
  3. Apply external scope: test within a defined public domain (here: American history) without expanding rules when you miss. Are you including highly significant events and people?
  4. Core-figure check: test whether the same set coherently aligns with the story of the symbolic framework/tradition's central figure. Are the principles, ethics and values of your chosen tradition reflected in these connections?
* Physics note: when you search many places, coincidences become inevitable (the “look-elsewhere” problem). A fair test defines rules and scope in advance and asks whether success continues without ad hoc adjustments.
The Great Invitation
© Neal Brandvik · All Rights Reserved
Home Take Action choose love movement Contact Author
Decorative footer mark