Landmark Use of AI-Generated Deepfake in Court

A groundbreaking development has taken place in a court of law, where an AI-generated deepfake of a deceased road rage victim delivered an impact statement during the sentencing hearing of the defendant, as reported by NBC News. This marks a first-time instance of such technology being utilized in a court setting.

The concept of using an AI version of the victim, Christopher Pelkey, originated from his family, according to a spokesperson for the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office. Pelkey’s sister had been working on the impact statement for two years but felt that her words would not adequately honor his memory. Pelkey was tragically shot and killed in 2021 during a road rage incident.

The idea of creating a deepfake avatar was born out of this desire to do justice to Pelkey’s memory. His sister wrote the script, telling CNN that she was confident it reflected his thoughts. With the approval of Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Todd Lang, the family presented a video of the AI-generated Pelkey in court. In the video, the avatar surprisingly advocated for leniency in sentencing his killer. The defendant had been convicted of manslaughter and endangerment earlier this year.

The AI-generated Pelkey addressed the court, saying, "To Gabriel Horcasitas, the man who shot me: It is a shame we encountered each other that day in those circumstances. In another life, we probably could have been friends. I believe in forgiveness." Despite this plea for forgiveness, the judge imposed the maximum sentence of over 10 years in prison. The judge acknowledged the forgiveness expressed by the AI-generated avatar, stating that it reflected Pelkey’s character.

However, the defense team has raised concerns about the admissibility of the AI presentation, citing potential grounds for appeal. "While judges certainly have latitude as to what to hear, particularly from victims, an appellate court will have to decide if this was error," defense lawyer Jason Lamm said. The case has already been retried due to procedural issues.

Expert Concerns About Legal Precedent

Arizona State University law professor Gary Marchant, an expert in ethics and emerging technologies, has expressed concerns about the implications of this case. "You see that person in the courtroom actually speaking, and in reality, they’re dead and they’re not speaking," he told NBC News. "So this is an extra jump that I feel is going to get us into dangerous grounds."