Final answer:
Due to the unclear notation in the question, a direct answer is not possible, but generally, when evaluating the truth of statements, consistency and coherence with established truths are required. This involves verifying initial judgments against empirical evidence or factual data.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question appears to be related to logical analysis and reasoning, potentially involving the evaluation of statements and their truth values. Given that the provided statements appear abstract and somewhat obscure due to lack of context and specificity (e.g., 'AOCD - AJAL'), it is challenging to provide a direct answer in two lines as requested, primarily because the question lacks clarity, and the symbols used do not conform to any standard mathematical, logical, or other academic notations. However, in general terms, the truth-value analysis of a statement requires an understanding of the coherence theory, which implies that a statement's veracity is determined by its coherence with other known truths or established facts, and this can include a correspondence aspect in which initial judgments need to be verified through direct observation or factual data.
To address the question more directly, recognizing that there could be a consistent error in other stated judgments (statements) is acknowledging that if one part of a logical system is false, other parts may also be false, especially if they are interdependent. Regarding coherence theory, it posits that truth is a property of a whole system of beliefs, where the truth of a single statement is a question of how well it fits within the context of the entire system. Thus, for a first judgment to be verified directly, it ought to correspond to factual data or empirical evidence that is consistent with the rest of the beliefs within the system.