🤯

I cannot think of anything that would be more disgraceful to the dead then erecting a digital puppet of them to put YOUR WORDS in THEIR MOUTH. If this was done with me I’d want my AI to call them ghoulish idiots and let out every curse word it knows.

How can a judge allow this? It is highly prejudicial. Would they have allowed an actor to portray him and do the same?

This country is legitimately batshit insane. It’s completely lost the plot.

Isn't this essentially manufactured evidence/false witnessing? @legaleagle.tv?

What fucking asinine useless tool of a judge allowed this? Can I just film a dramatic reading of something I wrote, performed by the lookalike of a dead person, and submit that to the court?

Allowing any AI into a court just gives way to allowing AI video as evidence. This should have been immediately shut down by the judge.

I assume people are going to have a problem with this but I think it’s a good idea depending on the actual final product. There’s a big difference between evidence at trial and a presentation at a sentencing hearing.

It wasn’t offered as evidence. Victim impact statements are given during sentencing after guilt has been adjudicated. Still weird af and not for me…but too many people in the replies thinking it was used to convict him.

no

There’s a really good explanation for why AI has never before been used to fabricate testimony in a judicial proceeding. … Hopefully, this is also the last time AI is used in a judicial proceeding…

Hey Siri, blow my fucking brains out on the bathroom wall