AI-generated dead man "speaks" at his killer's sentencing

[Occam's Banana]

(More like "AI-degenerated" ...)

This isn't creepy or disturbing at all.

That it was ever even allowed to happen in the first place is not a sign of danger or cause for concern.

In fact, I'm not even sure why I'm posting about it.

So never mind. Everything is fine. Carry on.

Road rage victim 'speaks' via AI at his killer's sentencing

The defendant got the maximum of 10½ years for the 2021 murder. His attorney called the presentation "inflammatory," providing grounds for appeal.

www.nbcnews.com

AI just made the dead speak in court
{Decoy Voice | 10 May 2025}

 

[Occam's Banana]

Court Allows AI Generated Victim Statement
{Actual Justice Warrior | 12 May 2025}

In this video, I discuss a case out of Arizona where a man killed during a road rage incident was brought back via AI in order to provide a victim impact statement in order to get a lighter sentence for the man convicted of killing him

Sources:

AI Video Full: A.I. of Murdered Chris Pelkey Makes His Own Impact Statement at Sentencing (a court 1st), with Judge
Article Explaining The Background: https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/09/tech/ai-courtroom-victim-impact-statement-arizona
​

 

[Anti Globalist]

This seems pretty disrespectful to the victim.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

So, basically people can bring Hollywood-style productions into court and they can be taken as some kind of evidence?

"Your honor, let me introduce into evidence a short movie that demonstrates exactly how the murder happened."

And let's be clear. This was not the victim. It was not the words of the victim. It was not the thoughts of the victim.

This was a production invented by the sister and whoever helped her.

 

[ClaytonB]

So, basically people can bring Hollywood-style productions into court and they can be taken as some kind of evidence?

"Your honor, let me introduce into evidence a short movie that demonstrates exactly how the murder happened."

And let's be clear. This was not the victim. It was not the words of the victim. It was not the thoughts of the victim.

This was a production invented by the sister and whoever helped her.

Victim statements are not evidence, it's just a chance for the victim (and/or family, etc.) to state what they feel about the verdict (to the court) or to make a direct statement of some kind to the convicted party (condemning, forgiving, etc.) The judge's choice to permit this is wackadoodle, but it's not a miscarriage of justice, in itself. I question the judge's judgment in the case itself, since he considers this a reasonable submission for a victim statement but, as I said, it is just a victim statement, not evidence.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Victim statements are not evidence, it's just a chance for the victim (and/or family, etc.) to state what they feel about the verdict (to the court) or to make a direct statement of some kind to the convicted party (condemning, forgiving, etc.) The judge's choice to permit this is wackadoodle, but it's not a miscarriage of justice, in itself. I question the judge's judgment in the case itself, since he considers this a reasonable submission for a victim statement but, as I said, it is just a victim statement, not evidence.

"I question the judge's judgment in the case itself, since he considers this a reasonable submission for a victim statement but, as I said, it is just a victim statement, not evidence yet."

FTFY.

 

[Occam's Banana]

So, basically people can bring Hollywood-style productions into court and they can be taken as some kind of evidence?

"Your honor, let me introduce into evidence a short movie that demonstrates exactly how the murder happened."

And let's be clear. This was not the victim. It was not the words of the victim. It was not the thoughts of the victim.

This was a production invented by the sister and whoever helped her.

It gives a whole new dimension to the concept denoted by the phrase "security theater".

Victim statements are not evidence, it's just a chance for the victim (and/or family, etc.) to state what they feel about the verdict (to the court) or to make a direct statement of some kind to the convicted party (condemning, forgiving, etc.) The judge's choice to permit this is wackadoodle, but it's not a miscarriage of justice, in itself. I question the judge's judgment in the case itself, since he considers this a reasonable submission for a victim statement but, as I said, it is just a victim statement, not evidence.

It isn't pre-conviction trial-phase evidence (yet), but it is testimonial "evidence" that factors into post-conviction decisions - which is quite bad enough, entirely apart from the fact that such precedents are laying the groundwork for the eventual admission of trial-phase testimony by "expert" AI systems (which gives a whole new dimension to the concept denoted by the phrase "trust the experts").

Anyone who thinks the "justice" system is already too inscrutably robotic and unaccountable should buckle up.

 

[TheTexan]

Would have been funnier if it said racist outlandish shit to get killer longer sentence

And probably more realistic

 

[ClaytonB]

It gives a whole new dimension to the concept denoted by the phrase "security theater".



It isn't pre-conviction trial-phase evidence (yet), but it is testimonial "evidence" that factors into post-conviction decisions - which is quite bad enough, entirely apart from the fact that such precedents are laying the groundwork for the eventual admission of trial-phase testimony by "expert" AI systems (which gives a whole new dimension to the concept denoted by the phrase "trust the experts").

Anyone who thinks the "justice" system is already too inscrutably robotic and unaccountable should buckle up.

Completely agree, and the AI hype-bros are explicitly laying the groundwork for this, they're making no pretenses about it:



"computational justice" ... possibly the most terrifying juxtaposition of two words possible in the English language...

 

[ClaytonB]

 

[Occam's Banana]

THREAD:

'"Journalist" Jim Acosta "interviews" AI-generated school-shooting victim'

Aug 5, 2025

Jim Acosta (former establishment-mouthpiece hack, and present "independent journalist" - LOL) reminds us that no matter how much we loathe and despise such creeps, we still don't loathe and despise them nearly enough.



Also Jim Acosta: "I believe in real news"

https://x.com/Acosta

• Occam's Banana
• Replies: 5
• Forum: U.S. Political News

 

[Occam's Banana]

h/t @unknown : https://ronpaulforums.com/threads/rip-charlie-kirk-assassinated-at-event-in-utah.572382/post-7315000

https://x.com/WarsawErik/status/1967312657704480894

Israeli Propaganda Fail!

This is a terrible trick to play!

They are misusing AI to put self-serving political words in an assassinated man's mouth to promote themselves!

Charlie Kirk did not even have these views when he passed away, this makes it even more devious.

Israel should apologize and denounce this!

Charlie Kirk fans, take note of this and see who your enemy is!

 

[Okie RP fan]

(More like "AI-degenerated" ...)

This isn't creepy or disturbing at all.

That it was ever even allowed to happen in the first place is not a sign of danger or cause for concern.

In fact, I'm not even sure why I'm posting about it.

So never mind. Everything is fine. Carry on.

Road rage victim 'speaks' via AI at his killer's sentencing

The defendant got the maximum of 10½ years for the 2021 murder. His attorney called the presentation "inflammatory," providing grounds for appeal.

www.nbcnews.com

AI just made the dead speak in court
{Decoy Voice | 10 May 2025}

Thanks for posting. That video brought up a few things I haven't considered and makes AI even more worrisome.