Comment on A Judge Accepted AI Video Testimony From a Dead Man
FauxLiving@lemmy.world 1 day agoAI should absolutely never be allowed in court. Defense is probably stoked about this because it’s obviously a mistrial. Judge should be reprimanded for allowing that shit
You didn’t read the article.
This isn’t grounds for a mistrial, the trial was already over. This happened during the sentencing phase. The defense didn’t object to the statements.
From the article:
Jessica Gattuso, the victim’s right attorney that worked with Pelkey’s family, told 404 Media that Arizona’s laws made the AI testimony possible. “We have a victim’s bill of rights,” she said. “[Victims] have the discretion to pick what format they’d like to give the statement. So I didn’t see any issues with the AI and there was no objection. I don’t believe anyone thought there was an issue with it.”
anachrohack@lemmy.world 1 day ago
It happened BEFORE sentencing
FauxLiving@lemmy.world 1 day ago
In the US criminal justice system, Sentencing happens after the Trial. A mistrial requires rules to be violated during the trial.
Also, there were at least 3 people in that room that both have a Juris Doctor and know the Arizona Court Rules, one of them is representing the defendant. Not a single one of them had any objections about allowing this statement to be made.
anachrohack@lemmy.world 22 hours ago
Every single one of those people should have their licenses suspended. AI, which is inherently a misrepresentation of truth, belongs nowhere near a courtroom
FauxLiving@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
Oh, you’re one of those