The Lincoln Assassination as Prototype Architecture: A Forensic System Analysis

PROMIS + BCCI: Twin Architectures of Hidden Finance

A Forensic System Architecture (FSA) comparative showing how a software platform and a global bank became parallel, interlocking blueprints for covert acquisition, deniable distribution, and accountability avoidance.

Forensic System Architecture PROMIS BCCI Hidden Finance Accountability Evasion

Executive Summary. PROMIS (case-management software alleged to be modified and distributed for intelligence leverage) and BCCI (a transnational bank later shut down for pervasive fraud and illicit finance) are usually treated as separate scandals. Using FSA, we map them as twin architectures: PROMIS operationalizes data leverage across jurisdictions; BCCI operationalizes capital leverage across jurisdictions. In practice, they share four structural features: (1) jurisdictional arbitrage, (2) privatized cutouts, (3) distributed international deployment, (4) post-hoc narrative fog. Together, they represent a prototype for modern hidden finance ecosystems.

Why These Two Together?

FSA looks for reusable structures, not just stories. PROMIS and BCCI express the same design in different substrates:

PROMIS → Information Substrate

• Target: Judicial/law-enforcement data.
• Mechanism: Software acquisition, modification, distribution.
• Payoff: Visibility into foreign/domestic processes; lead generation; leverage.

BCCI → Capital Substrate

• Target: Cross-border funds, correspondent banking, shells.
• Mechanism: Multi-jurisdiction entities, secrecy havens, regulatory fragmentation.
• Payoff: Shadow liquidity, covert payment rails, plausible deniability.

FSA Phase Map

Phase I — Reconstruction (timelines & pivots)

Late 1970s–80s

PROMIS: Publicly funded case-management evolves; later privatized/“enhanced.” Acquisition Moment
BCCI: Rapid global expansion; layering of entities across secrecy jurisdictions. Distribution Moment

Mid–Late 1980s

PROMIS: Contract disputes, bankruptcy leverage, allegations of modified exports; escalating litigation vs. merits denials. Control of IP
BCCI: Investigations reveal pervasive fraud, nominee structures, covert accounts; regulatory whack-a-mole across borders. Control of Flow

1991–1992

PROMIS: Mixed court outcomes; jurisdictional reversals overshadow factual controversies. Procedural Victory
BCCI: Global shutdowns/pleas; losses socialized, accountability fragmented. Containment

Phase II — Mapping (roles & flows)

FSA Component	PROMIS (Info Architecture)	BCCI (Capital Architecture)
Core Asset	Case-management platform + potential modifications	Banking licenses + correspondent network + shells
Acquisition Vector	Contract leverage, IP disputes, bankruptcy pressure	M&A of small banks; political capital; offshore charters
Distribution Vector	Government channels, private intermediaries, foreign partners	Nested entities, nominee accounts, cross-border affiliates
Cutouts	Contractors, resellers, “labs”/integration partners	Front companies, lawyers, private bankers
Value Extraction	Access to sensitive datasets; strategic insight	Hidden liquidity; covert payments; arbitrage
Oversight Evasion	Secrecy via IP disputes + classification + procedure	Fragmented regulators + secrecy jurisdictions

Phase III — Anomaly Catalog

• Jurisdictional Technicalities > Merits: Procedural reversals or fragmented enforcement substitute for factual adjudication.
• Privatized Intermediaries: Contractors and shells act as deniable buffers between state/finance and operational effects.
• Asymmetric Transparency: Victims and publics face opacity; insiders maintain selective visibility.
• International Ping-Pong: Cross-border complexity converts oversight into referral loops and delays.

Phase IV — Structural Hypothesis

Hypothesis: PROMIS and BCCI instantiate a shared Hidden Finance Meta-Architecture—one harvesting information, the other routing funds—that optimizes for deniable leverage in contested domains. Their modularity (software plug-ins / legal entities) enables rapid cloning into new contexts.

Prototype Comparison: What Repeats

Prototype Principle	Expression in PROMIS	Expression in BCCI	Modern Echoes*
Legal Leverage Over Substance	IP/contract disputes overshadow technical forensics	Home/host regulator gaps delay decisive action	BigTech antitrust & fintech enforcement lag
Private Cutouts as Policy	Integrators/resellers as deniable channels	Fronts/agents move funds without bank brand	Third-party data brokers; payment facilitators
Transnational Distribution	Exports & integrations across allies/targets	Network of affiliates across secrecy hubs	Global cloud + correspondent fintech rails
Narrative Fog Post-Crisis	Conflicting claims; classification; “conspiracy” labels	Complex collapse narratives; losses diffused	Supply-chain hacks; cross-border crypto failures

*Illustrative echoes; the FSA lens flags structure, not equivalence.

Implications: Reading Today’s Systems

Policy & Oversight

• Substance over Procedure: Create review tracks that can pierce classification/IP to inspect actual mechanisms.
• Cross-Border Teams: Joint, time-boxed oversight with shared evidence rooms to avoid “referral purgatory.”
• Cutout Accounting: Mandatory registries for integrators/fronts serving critical systems.

Investigative Practice

• Follow Modules: In software: who wrote plug-ins? In finance: who owns the shells?
• Map Denial Paths: Who can plausibly say “we never touched it,” and how was that engineered?
• Time-Synchronize: Align legal events, cash movements, deploys, and media narratives.

Early-Warning Indicators (FSA Watchlist)

• Procedural Velocity: Aggressive use of jurisdictional motions before fact discovery begins.
• Integrator Sprawl: Rapid growth of opaque vendors handling “sensitive” modules or payments.
• Disjoint Audits: Multiple regulators/auditors with narrow scopes and no common ledger.
• Narrative Asymmetry: Heavy reliance on rumor/innuendo to dismiss calls for technical inspection.

Appendix: Method Snapshot (FSA)

Our A→Z Process in This Comparative

1. Scoping: Treat software (PROMIS) and bank (BCCI) as systems with common design aims.
2. Reconstruction: Build synchronized timelines; identify acquisition and distribution inflection points.
3. Mapping: Chart legal entities, intermediaries, and data/money flows; note cutouts.
4. Anomalies: Catalog where procedure beats substance; where accountability fragments.
5. Hypothesis: Propose a meta-architecture; test against modern echoes for structural rhyme.
6. Output: Present side-by-side tables + watchlist to enable future detection.

Bottom line: PROMIS and BCCI are not just scandals; they are templates. Once you see the template, you can spot its descendants.

Series: Forensic System Architecture — Hidden Blueprints of Power

Have a lead or dataset for this series? Consider how it maps to acquisition, distribution, cutouts, and oversight gaps. If it fits, it likely rhymes with this twin architecture.