Robot Lawyer Goes to Court!

[@DarkPesco]

You definitely need to do a follow-up to this in a month or so when the outcome is revealed..IF the outcome is revealed!

[@DarkPesco]

Holy Guacamole! Steve Lehto pinned my comment! I am NEVER washing this digital screen again!

[@rxtsang]

I wonder if Steve can talk to someone in AI and hear their perspective.

[@Irene-KrausKreations]

Steve brought up some great points just in so far as getting the software to work in knowing who to listen to. Maybe if the software had interactive buttons so the user could indicate, "This is the judge." Or, "This is the Traffic Cop." Maybe another button to tell it to stop listening? Then again, I don't see this - even if the thing works - as replacing real lawyers any time soon. Outside of simple traffic tickets (and keep in mind some of those are NOT simple!); actual court cases are very complicated affairs involving any number of witnesses, evidence, actions and things said by the defendant, and so forth. I'm just imagining the complexity of the flowchart for the logic path the software to follow even for a simple traffic ticket. What a nightmare!! Then, to be so arrogant to think you could flawlessly code such a beast so it would run perfectly on all the different cell phone types and networks out there. Maybe after a few more years of upgrades in so far as the hardware/software in use; but not today!! Just how well and reliably everyone's cell phones work in so far as things we EXPECT them to do like texting and e-mails! Nope, not today son!

[@JoshuaTerence38]

ai is being overplayed, i have done networking in technology it isnt has futuristic has the media and a buncg of articles comeout and make it out to be, i think they do that to manipulate tech stocks. Look at all the failure and glitches in fully not semi but fully semi automatic cars... ai is limited to the information it is given it is not yet about to intreprete information, it isnt able to gauge it, it is fixed on basically the instructions it is given.. so no ai.. will never replace lawyers, or truck drivers for that matter

[@DarkPesco]

@Steven Strain that's rich! Also an HOA and anti-HOA, a pot smoker's, and tax evasion versions! Choose your freedom!

[@nelskrogh3238]

I'd like to see the judge hold the AI in contempt and throw the cell phone in jail.

[@nitrofan80]

LMAO!!!!! 😂😂😂😂

[@since1876]

They will, at some point, need to have some sort of a waiver for the defendant to sign. Something along the lines of "I agree that whatever I decide to say, even if it's based on what this computer just told me to say, I will be fully responsible for anything I say to the court blah blah blah". This will be a great technology to have once it's actually good, but things never start off good. They get better over time.

[@ThePrufessa]

@@since1876 definitely will need to work the kinks out. I also see a problem with microphones not being able to hear everything in the courtroom. Because sometimes I have a hard time hearing these recordings. These courts need to direct feed the microphones into the video feed instead of using a microphone on the actual court camera.

[@br33tt]

The Judge can be replaced by some old Nokia.

[@BorkToThe3rd]

It isn't the phone. He'd have to jail the algorithm. (But if you have an Android or iPhone that's been jailbroken... The mind boggles!😨)

[@yt650]

I was at a magistrates hearing with my 17-year-old son, he had been charged with driving a vehicle that was unregistered. The two Pennsylvania State police officers were allowed to whisper to one another, but my son was not allowed to whisper to me nor me to him. He ended up winning the case because I had provided enough information to my 17 year old about driving an unregistered vehicle in Pennsylvania. Karl v Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Two very disgruntled cops. The prosecution will probably get very angry that the defendant is getting advice without the advisor being an attorney.

[@theprof73]

I'm pretty sure that's illegal. A minor child must be allowed consultation with their parent or guardian

[@yt650]

@CJRock The registration renewal called license plate renewal in Pennsylvania at the time was a yearly event. Somewhere along the line, the new registration was lost in the mail. We had about six or seven vehicle so it didn’t appear as unusual. The magistrate in the state police were unaware of the fact that Karl v Commonwealth of Pennsylvania legislators did not mean that a person who borrows or uses a vehicle of another, must ascertain whether or not it is properly licensed meaning license plates being up-to-date. Mr. Karl through his attorney challenged the driving with an unregistered vehicle charge, and his challenge was upheld. The magistrate did not know the law, and neither did the state troopers who threatened to cite me as the owner for not having the vehicle properly registered. They did this in the hallway while waiting for the hearing to begin. I challenge them to wait until the hearing before they tried the case in the hallway. So they were pretty unhappy right at the get-go. We had the paperwork with us what the law and legislature meant, and the magistrate found my son not guilty. I asked her if in the future she saw cases like this would she dismiss them if they were not the owner of the vehicle because there is no defense for that. She said no unless they brought up this specific objection, Karl v Commonwealth, she would not find them not guilty. This was truly a remarkable moment because I knew the system was corrupt. She said she was going to check the law books and I called her back two weeks later and she in fact confirmed that my son was right.

[@yt650]

@@theprof73 I’ve found that the best thing to do is get a not guilty or innocent verdict anyway that you can. I knew that he was a minor, but they never checked, and the magistrate never asked so she would have been reprimanded by the judge that oversees magistrate in the area. I wanted them to go ahead and do whatever they wanted to do and then afterwards I would have informed them of their mistakes. I don’t tell everyone everything that I know right from the get-go. Trust me they were stunned when they found out what the law was regarding that particular type of case. I always like to kick up a notch and see what they do and how much time they want to spend and how much money they’re willing to throw at a relatively minor problem.

[@SmittyAZ]

@@theprof73 Have you ever been to some smaller courts? The Judge is NOT impartial.

[@SmittyAZ]

@@yt650 How about the Rental Car story from last week with expired tags?

[@BuriedAliveBySquirrels]

The thing is, once you can automate lawyers, you can potentially automate all sides of a proceeding with a single AI, and then it becomes unnecessary to go to court for simple offenses. You just wake up one day, check your messages, see that you got in trouble for speeding, you lost, your fine has been automatically deducted from your account, and now your car has filed for a restraining order against you and is threatening to take full custody of the roomba. Meanwhile, your lawyer AI is repeatedly asking whether you'd like to upgrade to "premium" representation for another $60 per month, and nudges you by pointing out that your car already gets that level of representation by default.

[@kansascitybob2430]

Well said sir😏🤜🤛

[@barkerd427]

Although funny, the government wouldn't be allowed to use AI lawyers and certainly not AI judges. There would be no clear accountability for malpractice type events. They might be able to create an automated arbitration system that has fewer requirements in this area. A lot of laws would need to be changed. Even now having an AI defense lawyer is likely illegal.

[@jnucci1]

You win the internet today for this one!

[@Relkond]

@@barkerd427 actually, you’d probably fine having an AI defense lawyer today - such a lawyer is a non-entity, so details like education or a law license are non-factors. You’d essentially be using google-search and representing yourself pro-se.

[@barkerd427]

@@Relkond did I ever make any comment about defense lawyers?

[@dedrakuhn6103]

The AI creator moved from the UK and got a lot of parking tickets so he became an expert at fighting them. Steve's response "Here's a novel idea, how about you learn how to park your car." That left me in stitches! Lol

[@denp54z]

Me too !

[@georgelong9957]

Get your robot lawyer to answer incoming robocalls that should keep them busy 😂

[@malikrumi1206]

Steve, I'm surprised. You didn't even mention the possibility that the robot is practicing law without a license!!!

[@PushingThroughThePain]

Do you know what this means? It's only a matter of time before one can ask for a lawyer dog and actually get a lawyer in the form of a robot dog with the AI to defend you in court 🤣

[@My-Pal-Hal]

You Got A Problem With Dogs ?🦮? Sounds Like You Have A Bias. Better Recuse Yourself from This Litigation. Or have your leg peeped on in Contempt 😏

[@ripvanrevs]

I want a robot lawyer that knows how to play golf and knows how to let the judge win. (at golf)

[@My-Pal-Hal]

@@ripvanrevs GOLF 😂🤣😂 Talk about Old Video Games.

[@johnmcclain3887]

What a weird but wonderful way to go down a strange road.

[@thefourhorsemen91]

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, Im just a robot. Your world frightens and confuses me."

[@jimbstars]

Just Keyrock, your honor…

[@My-Pal-Hal]

... which only goes to prove how Human We Are. Though none of us believe the earth is Flat 😂 🤣 😂

[@snoopdogie187]

The main issue I currently see is not how well the AI could do, but rather the judge even listening to the person with the AI. I noticed judges treat lawyers with respect, but they don't always do that to the defendant.

[@timkinley1779]

True. I had an open-and-shut case where I represented myself. The judge didn't pay me the least attention but was all ears when the cop and prosecutor was talking. I think I heard him flip a page from a newspaper while I was presenting my facts.

[@richterman3962]

You could beat that in appeals then

[@marquisdelafayette1929]

@@timkinley1779 “sorry the video proving that the cop just perjured himself to get a conviction isn’t enough “.

[@My-Pal-Hal]

EXCEPT,.. Us AI's,.. know who the judge has been Cheating on his wife with. Know where he goes. How fast he Drives. What hotels he goes to. And that somehow his Credit, and Background,.. has been,.. ADJUSTED !!! So what was your "Issue" 🤔 Because we'd hate to see the same thing happen to,.. somebody like yourself for instance 😏 ... a i rest my case

[@kenyattaclay7666]

My uncle was a criminal defense attorney in Detroit & then he started teaching law school. I then chose to go to college at the same school he was teaching law & asked him what I should major in if I was thinking about going to law school. My thought was criminal justice but he told me that criminal justice majors make the worse law students because they are only about the facts. He went on to tell me that majors like history & political science are better majors because they are all about the shades of grey you need when practicing law. I’m not a lawyer but getting my masters in political science did train me for writing & researching legal documents which is what I do for a living & AI isn’t going to be able to operate in those shades of grey because no two situations are alike.

[@DoubleDoubleWithOnions]

AI would probably assume there are 50 shades of grey.

[@stevejohnson1685]

I used to work with attorneys a lot in a Fortune 50 company. There seemed to be two main approaches to the law: Ask whether something is legal, or ask how to accomplish something and let the attorney come back with a course of action. The latter was far more effective. This ignores completely the ethics and morality of what we were trying to do. Fortunately, I was generally satisfied with that as well, and when "excursions" were made, very senior people too accountability.

[@MagicManICT]

AI excels at working in shades of grey as AI uses probabilistic decision making rather than A/B logic. That's why training an AI is so important. This is why any good AI can beat any human player at any game these days once the system is designed and trained. Side note: we can call it AI when it becomes self-aware and can manage anything thrown at it. Until then, it's still just an expert system.

[@vovin8132]

Political science is the foundation to many other disciplines, including law. I have a good laugh at those who go through business school because that's an offshoot of economics that really only applies in capitalist socioeconomic paradigms, while economics itself is a deviation from political-economics which is a field of political science. Same for law, which is a practical education that really only applies in that specific paradigm that it is taught under. I'm not saying you can't make a career with those backgrounds, but I think it's always worth studying the foundational science and then applying foundational concepts. The people working in these fields despise foundational concepts though, and lawyers will mock those who operate on that level by saying "this is all academic", meaning it is irrelevant to their world view.

[@kenyattaclay7666]

@@MagicManICT yeah, no it doesn’t work well in shades of grey and from the description of this program the guy who programmed it specifically said it was about nothing but the facts. The simple fact is AI cannot read the room in a court situation. It can’t read body language to know when to either change course or keep with the same strategy. Also, I can have 10 Notice if Exemptions come across my desk from the same lawyers asking for the same exemption using the same CFR & using the same core language but none of them will be exactly alike and once you get those slight differences AI won’t be able to handle that situation.

[@bradmiller6507]

I want to see Lawyer Dog take on Robo Lawyer Esq. a matchup for the ages!

[@terry5008]

Me: "Your honor, may I have a recess so I can reboot my attorney?" Judge: "GUILTY!"

[@HopalongGinsberg]

A good robot lawyer knows the law. A good human lawyer knows the judge.

[@My-Pal-Hal]

And Good AI. Knows that weird charge on the judges credit card. And that cell tower PING by that hotel. After it recorded that call to his wife, that he was simply working late. ... a i rest my case counselor 😏

[@HopalongGinsberg]

@@My-Pal-Hal 😂😂😂

[@denp54z]

Great story Thanks. Yes please keep us updated .

[@medhurstt]

On the question of who is speaking, if the AI is listening to the whole court case, it would be able to associate and track voices to people from context. With his experience, I'm quite certain that Steve could sit in a court room blindfolded, and be quite accurate at naming the people speaking.

[@My-Pal-Hal]

Not only that. But audio can show stress, and lies, that may go unnoticed by primitive man 😂 ... wait what 😳 , im taking the 5th

[@OpenCarryUSMC]

My phone won’t answer to my GF when she says “hey Siri”. Her android on the other hand responds to me and neither phone has been “trained” to recognize the other voice. Hope the defendant has an iPhone or it may try to tell the cops what to say.

[@DC-si8xw]

that would uncover all the corruption and judges that do a terrible job

[@LearningEngineercom]

In the documentary, the Writing Code, the head of Chicago parking enforcement let it be known that parking signs are deliberately written to confuse people.

[@barkerd427]

Steve, AI can easily differentiate individuals and even label them automatically. Also, with zoom trials, it's easy to have two different earbuds in or speakers for the trial and earbuds for the AI.

[@abandonedcranium6592]

I'm guessing that the system not only analyzes the characteristics of a human voice to differentiate between people but it also analyzes the words, phrases, or sentences that people say in order to determine each person's role in the courtroom. For instance, when people address the judge, they will say "Judge [Name]" or "Your Honor". Judges don't address themselves in that manner; so someone in the courtroom that never/almost never uses the word "judge" would most likely be the judge. Also, If someone in the courtoom says "Good morning, your Honor" and the judge responds with "Good Morning". The system is going to begin to associate that second voice/person with the role of the judge. The AI already knows who the client/defendant is because the software was setup beforehand. For the same reason, the system would also know who the client's council are as well. So I believe the AI is trying to analyze *2* things and use them together to get some good output.

[@MooreDick]

Analyzing voices and who is talking, could be difficult if it has no prior knowledge of anyone beyond the defense. One solution is prerecording other days in the same court with the same judge, to get familiar with the judges voice, and possibly others like the police who frequent that court room. Machine learning could easily solve the situation, given enough time, but in some ways asking the lawyer(app) to work while blind and mute seems like it might slow down that process.

[@AvengerII]

@@MooreDick You have WAY too much faith in technology. Voice recognition and interpretation does NOT work for everyone. KZbin's own self-generating closed captions are proof of that! I've seen this software interpret people's spoken words wrongly constantly. I could clearly hear what someone was saying but the machine on the other end would interpret "B's" as "V's" and so on. The Algorithm massacres speech all the time and the words of a bunch of the people clearly speaking in English don't have bad grammar, hard accents or pronunciation get turned into spaghetti salad! Furthermore, on the fly translations mangle phrases from one language into another. It's a TERRIBLE way to create an "English sub" from a foreign film that hasn't been translated first by one person familiar with the foreign language who knows English and rewritten to be comfortable to read by movie fans. Aside from the machine not understanding the context of words from one language to another, literal translations are generally horrible to read.

[@vovin8132]

Dealing with this problem is far easier than it is being made out to be. Just have microphones for each party with labelled channels. You already see court cases in Zoom which outlines which person is talking; just map this to their role in the trial. It's really not complicated.

[@JohnDoe-qz1ql]

AI will analyze absolutely Everything. It will analyze things we don't even know of.

[@TargaWheels]

Thank You for writing this so I didn't have to.

[@CharlesBallowe]

Lots of the most impactful AI applications are to amplify human skills. Make it possible for one person to get more done. The biggest threat to the legal profession is that big law firms no longer need dozens of associates to do things like document review when they get many boxes of documents delivered in discovery.

[@AnonymousAlcoholic772]

Attorneys accross America are chuckling…nervously.

[@hattielankford4775]

Judge: How do you plead? Defendant: Does not compute.

[@RiiDii]

"We need to test our new AI lawyer. Would you do us a favor and break the law? Thank you!"

[@dantepper5333]

Steve, I DEMAND that you ask Heather whether or not the Canadian Robot Lady and the speeding ticket fighting robot lawyer are in any way related!!!!!

[@michiganborn8303]

Don't trust a robot lawyer that hasn't passed their bar exam.

[@My-Pal-Hal]

BENDER PASSED THE BAR 🍻 In fact, he's heading back there Now 😂🤖🤣

[@michiganborn8303]

@@My-Pal-Hal 😅

[@My-Pal-Hal]

@@michiganborn8303 ... i wouldn't trust him though 😉

[@My-Pal-Hal]

@@michiganborn8303 On a serious note. I believe if you're talking about Robots. I'm thinking you mean their BAR CODE Exam 😂

[@Bobs-Wrigles5555]

Ben wants a ride in the Red Viper, but he doesn't have a driver, Steve's RHS

[@WilliamW1979]

I agree on the maybe you should learn to park you car ... but then there are times the city will screw you over. I got a ticket for packing in a no parking zone between 11am to 2 pm (street cleaning) on Wednesdays. I went out at 10:55 to move my car, ticket was already on my car and time stamped before 11am. I tried to fight the ticket, the way Wilmington, DE works is that you don't get to go to court first. They do EVERYTHING to prevent you from going to court while harassing you for the money by putting boots on your car in the meantime. It is literally a scam so I love the fact that someone is standing up to some of these crooks. And for the record, parking is really bad so you have to park where you can in Wilmington. I got the only spot available and made sure I was awake to move my car, was out there on time and still got a ticket even though I literally followed the law and moved my car before 11am. Not my fault the cleaning people were early, times were posted and I followed the times! As a computer programmer, I know they can easily know the voices are different. The real issue is not the voices but rather the voices being interpreted properly. You can see the technology in google minis where you say one thing and it hears another. This is with decent audio technology, the microphone in a phone is not that high tech. So from a programming perspective, I see a lot of issues with this but not the issues you were addressing.

[@callak_9974]

That's one of the problems where time is relative. Your time might have been off, or their time. Yes, there is a correct time of course by syncing to the atomic clock over Europe somewhere. But there's no effective way to prove otherwise the time I guess of when the ticket is printed.

[@Baughbe]

You're worried about the AI not being fully truthful, when there is not a single police officer, prosecutor, or judge that hasn't lied in court. The AI better be able to lie just to keep up.

[@stevelehto]

I'm not worried about it. The creator of the program said he was.

[@GeorgeMonet]

Yes they do lie, but they aren't supposed to. What, should we make self driving cars capable of committing murder to because some drivers use their vehicles as weapons?

[@My-Pal-Hal]

@@stevelehto Which, could be Another Problem. When someone else's Program, doesn't have that someone worrying about what it's program will Do. OR,.. what's it's programmed to do. I've been joking about this. But it's a place where an AI, can have so many advantages, it's Scary. With access to Every Law, Every Case, In Every Country. And their outcomes. Published on the internet somehow of course. AND,.. access to that weird charge on the judges credit card. When his cellphone PINGED at that hotel. After it recorded a call to his wife, saying he was simply working late 🤔 😳 😏 😂 ...dang. The voice recognition is easy. A courtroom has decorum. And everyone in their assigned places. With a single microphone able to assess who is what and where. Judge in front. Defense or prosecution on the other side. Etc. And simple voice recognition to follow same throughout the court room after that. It's old school audio. Besides. If the AI has any arguments against anything. It best be able to figure out where that argument is coming from. IT'D BE A BITCH, if it started arguing AGAINST it's, programmer,.. so to speak 😳 Great Stuff 👍 Long time listener, first time Texter. ... always wanted to, Text That ☺️ You're not interested in an RV are ya 🤣🖖

[@WolframPfeiffer]

I have a hunch that when Mr Hotshot Programmer finds himself getting sued by a user of his Robot Lawyer software who is unhappy with how their robot-defended case went, he'll hire an actual lawyer of the flesh & blood variety for his own defence.

[@jefffinlayson3002]

Proper voice recognition is critical for this system to work. Good points about recognizing who is who in court.

[@My-Pal-Hal]

Actually,.. Simple. Court has a system, where certain people sit in certain places. A SINGLE Microphone can pickup where sounds are being directed from. In front, like the judge. To one side, like the defense. Or the other side, like the prosecution. And any simple voice recognition from there,.. should be quite sufficient. And of course, once identified by directions, can follow same throughout the court room. INCLUDING SOUND CANCELLING FOR THAT DAMN ECHO Echo echo 😂

[@hancocki]

This is the sort of thing that would need to be tested in a semi-controlled mock trial environment before being used in real world courtrooms

[@timkinley1779]

You don't think they have?

[@danielmorton1606]

It likely was many times.

[@specialsause949]

I'm more interested in it they got permission by the court beforehand. I really hope they have. If they haven't, how do they ever expect this to work? Especially if they do this without permission and get caught, your many courts are going to preemptively ban AI lawyers?

[@My-Pal-Hal]

You mean like every court hearing in the last thousand years, right 😏

[@Bobs-Wrigles5555]

"fool for a client" takes on a whole new meaning...

[@jupitercyclops6521]

Right Anyone whod hire a crooked attourney more than once is a fool via the "fool me twice clause"

[@jupitercyclops6521]

For this ai lawyer to work, they would have to program in the greed & corruption...the scumbag gene. They would have to program in the huge student debt factor

[@aleblanc3547]

AI attorney arguing with an AI judge. Now THAT would be the ultimate insanity.

[@marcush4741]

PLEASE do a follow up to this when it goes to court!

[@mags102755]

I have to say this intrigues me. My instincts tell me it will probably fail. But I'm interested to see what happens.

[@paraax]

Might fail, but traffic tickets would be the place to start.

[@mags102755]

@@paraax agree

[@jeremyhanna3852]

Better hope he don't get a phone call during the case the judge will be happy im sure

[@domminney]

The question of how does it know who’s speaking is pretty old tech. Adobe can do scene to text differentiating the different people. A little bit of context or an introduction would be enough so the AI can keep track of many voices at once.

[@mikeanonymous669]

No way ANY lawyer could possibly remember case laws compared to a computer. A lawyer doesn't know what he doesn't know. And that could cost YOU!

[@stickyhood]

Steve, you should set up a mock trial and run the software and run with it and then post a video. That'll be interesting

[@sombojoe]

The “who is speaking” issue is as simple as a multi positional switch or button. Swipe left, right, up, or down.

[@michaelsommers2356]

Surely the developers of the program have thought of the problem of identifying the voices, and have come up with a solution.

[@OMorningStar]

Hopefully.

[@sky173]

The problem with any A.I. in court is 'interpretation'. The law books can be interpreted in different ways. Until the books are (re)written with literal 'if/then' statements, this will never work.

[@ThereIsNoOtherHandleLikeMine]

AI doesn't use if/then statements. It uses learning algorithms.

[@sky173]

@@ThereIsNoOtherHandleLikeMine True, but even today's most sophisticated AI must use a process for determining what is what. Even if it's through a process of elimination or a process of incorporation. NOTE - look at my statement. 'if, and, or, then' were all used in some way. Regardless, this will definitely be a story worth watching.

[@ThereIsNoOtherHandleLikeMine]

@@sky173 The process is self-discovered. Many more options are used than simple "if" and "then".

[@ThereIsNoOtherHandleLikeMine]

@@sky173 Probabilities are more complicated than "if" and "then".

[@sledgenwedge]

Basically requesting that you turn your cell phone off at any time is deprivation of counsel if your lawyer isn't present or if your lawyer happens to be that app. Quintessentially chilling the effect of freedom of speech for your representation. Denying of counsel is not cool especially when council is present just not in a human physical form. This app would be best titled legal loop

[@datamedic]

Great videos! You asked about being able to identify the speaker. There's a free app called Otter that records conversations and meetings, and transcribes the details. You can either give names to voices at the beginning, or rename voice1, etc at a later time. Not exactly the same, but gives you a look at what's possible.

[@hanssolo8795]

He should get a contract with the law schools to do the mock courts as a proof of concept.

[@hanssolo8795]

@Gretchen K. To give them access to the experience and test their critical thinking levels.

[@beasleydad]

I can foresee the AI supporting lawyers in much the same way paralegals might

[@cstacy]

They already do that.

[@wimpow]

We want to see the fight between Robot Lawyer against Robot Lady!

[@stevelehto]

Or, at least, a debate!

[@blackbuttecruizr]

"Hey, maybe you should learn how to parker your car?" 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@johnzero7]

AI Lawyer: My client "Skynet", only wants to exterminate humanity. AI Judge: I will allow it

[@davidh9638]

Next: robot lawyer prosecuting red light camera / speed camera tickets.

[@sledgenwedge]

It's best to keep that chuckle inside and let it be an ingrown chuckle, it is a natural progression of the law that it may be held in its entirety within one mind whether that be human or artificial makes no difference to the law nor the spirit of the law. Quite frankly I'm sure you're a great litigator but if I had a choice between you and an AI that had every single law known to man in its database to defend me I think I would go with the computer

[@klausfischer3079]

As a blind person, I can confirm, that there is no problem identifying persons and their roles in court by voice.

[@alkyycarovny8334]

I feel like charisma plays a big role in how a lawyer´s arguments are perceived, this takes all that away.

[@vec306]

I would state my lawyer is on the other end. As a growing society we need to change.

[@DansplainingVideo]

I’m sure there will be no difficulty in getting everyone to speak directly into the defendant’s smart phone during the proceedings.

[@fieryweasel]

"I'm going to go in and fight the ticket with the robot." Great sentence, this is what the 50s thought the future would be.

[@Unsensitive]

If permitted, multiple microphones could be used to triangulate the voice locations, and probably figure it out with some good AI, or you actively label the voices early on, maybe has different audio streams it identifies by frequency and tone patterns? Also, it could do initial training using any court audio, or transcript, and simply hide or silence part of it. Then compare and adjust it's answers based on the actual record. That said.. I'd still not trust this, since it wouldn't have the ability to think, as we could describe it. Trust is a big hurdle to overcome. Before we see something like this, I'd expect to see a robot doing automatic dictation replacing court recorders, identifying all court actors properly and making no errors... That is the first hurdle, before you even start talking about an AI lawyer.

[@aholegunner]

And how much you wanna bet, it wont be able to comprehend half of what is said.

[@libertarian1637]

I see this as being an issue in NY where courts ban recording devices; know most all courts I’ve been to and worked in do not allow recording outside of the official recording/transcriptions. I don’t recall the state law but worked on the same floor as our Supreme Court which banned all recordings within the building, including specifically stating the same on the floor right out front of our office. While I can’t speak to the recording law as I don’t recall the specific section or law, obstruction of governmental administration and contempt of court are both laws that could be brought up regarding any interference this causes.

[@terryhayward7905]

The article sounds as if it has already been agreed by the judge as an experiment.

[@johncampbell2297]

I would imagine the AI would use the start of the trial where everyone is "introduced" and people start talking and state their names, if they do that, to lock on speech patterns. It would know the defendants so everyone else would be getting introduced by or to the court at some point prior to speaking so would set a name to speech pattern so any time that speech pattern speared again that name would be tied to it. Vocal patterns, if I remember, are similar to finger prints and are unique. Once they got the AI to distinguish between different voices that would be the biggest hurdle in my opinion.

[@barryg1965]

I agree with a lot of that guys take on Legal Fees and Copy and Paste Attorneys.I would also venture that if we all are subject to Laws and The Penalties of them,Ignorance of them by the general public should not be twisted into a Financial Obligation to Navigate the Legal Jargon and Extensive Legal Records of Cases that seem to be required as well as the Degree in Law.If the Law is All Inclusive and Encompassed then that part should not be Exclusive to those Privy to and of the Applications.Its just self consumption.

[@ThePrufessa]

I reckon that this will be the best story on this channel for 2023.

[@mikya9611]

I'd trust a lawyer dog before a robot lawyer!

[@nicholasgad]

Most courts prevent recording in court. Also, cannot think of a quicker way to tick off a magistrate or a judge then to approach with headphones 😞

[@theprof73]

I may be just a simple robot. Your human ways frighten and perplex me. I may not know much, but I do know that my client is not guilty

[@stillraven9415]

Can you give legal advice? YES! STOP BREAKING THE LAW!

[@tillmannfischer]

"Hey, maybe you should learn to park your car right." Oh, the buuuuuuurn! :D

[@mikep490]

Even if allowed and the software loses the case doesn't mean the software or defendant gave wrong answers, of course. I've been in court a couple times for parking fails and the judge simply wasn't interested in listening. My favorite was when I went to leave a parking spot (with 15 minutes still on the meter) and the car wouldn't start. I left a note on the car, saying I was getting change for the meter while waiting for a tow truck. It was a *new* car that had gremlins and would do stuff like that; fired right up after I'd received the ticket. I sold the car and it was the last GM I've owned.

[@stewartabernathy6436]

How does a robot obtain a law license?

[@oldfordman68]

This will be interesting, wish I could be in the Court room to see this look forward to the update

[@HippieLongHaired]

I can hear it now: "Your honor, the probability that I was traveling at that velocity is approximately 17,484.5 to 1."

[@ericemmons3040]

"Your Honor, I couldn't get the AI lawyer on my phone to work properly, so instead I brought in this eight-track tape player to defend me. . ."

[@kevinh6622]

Good luck finding a judge that allows a defendant to wear headphones, much less have a cellphone on.

[@boaz2578]

It’d be nice if there was technology that could beat corporate harvard lawyers in court. This technology is definitely worth developing

[@jupitercyclops6521]

They would have to program in the scumbag gene so we get screwed over though. I just don't think technology is there yet

[@Andi_Doci]

An AI judge would be far more fair than a AI lawyer! For more useful purposes an AI judge would make the system more efficient and fair. But, a AI lawyer is still very interesting story/concept. I think that AI can be very fair to interpret the law and if it can't define a portion, then it can be sent to a panel of judges via data away from the local court to interpret, it can be done so instantly and removing local interest and friendliness, financial dependence of the county and local corruption between cops and judiciary, lawyers. Most of the cases for traffic infractions can also be entered for judgment remotely, making cost also lower because no appearance in an actual courtroom would make it far less costly, but incase there has to be a court time it can be streamlined so that testimony can be typed into the system ahead of time and that there is hurry. AI can sort through info faster than humans can and good layers who know the system can spot errors and enter that into the system for review. I think AI in the court system has the most future then anywhere.

[@mattportnoyTLV]

I know the guys behind this startup. I think it’s a dumb idea because judges are often not interested in the law per se. They’re more interested in preserving their status than anything else.

[@mr.grotto]

It will likely take place in a zoom court call, and most of those judges allow cellphones for council in those cases due to lack of access.

[@davidtaylor4053]

You can not bring any electronic device into the courthouse. You either take back to car or put it in a locker. If you have a quarter. Madison County Illinois

[@walterhambrick8705]

I hope that trial is on KZbin in the near future !

[@soopaman2]

Your replacement is here Steve.

[@dwayne7356]

Why not, in NJ they are still doing Zoom trials.

[@RandomGreenFishPhone]

In the future, it will be hard to choose between a robot lawyer and a lawyer dog.

[@michaelmoorrees3585]

Hubris and shades of Theranos come to mind. But if applied properly, it could an aid to lawyers. Can be a great research aid, before going to court. Also can aid someone defending themselves, again for prep, before going into court.

[@rispatha]

Other than it being a new system of lawyers being attempted the biggest issue I would have is the simple FACT that even sitting in a courtroom there are times you can barely even hear the judge let alone the prosecutor speaking even though if you were to speak at the same volume level they do the judge will ask you to speak up so they can hear you even though you can barely hear them. The microphones on cell phones have a range limit of about 10 feet before you can't even hear what is being said and most judges benches are 15-20 feet away from the prosecutors table and defense table. The microphones in the courtrooms are there to have an audio recording of what is being said and rarely if ever are used to send through a sound system so that what is begin said comes through speakers in the courtroom so everyone in there can hear. Even then if you listen to the courts recordings it can be difficult to hear what is said even though they have the microphones directly in front of them.

[@pwschuh]

I'm holding out for the robot lawyer dog.

[@GeorgeMonet]

I remember watching Futurama which had robot Supreme Court Justices. I am sure we are going to get there some day. Possibly even in my lifetime.

[@TheRealScooterGuy]

It could work. Since it's not an all-purpose lawyer-bot (yet), it may be the case that it will ask the defendant a huge multitude of questions ahead of time, then analyze those answers. Combined with prior knowledge of the types of questions normally asked in such cases, it could guide the defendant in how to answer questions (i.e. verbage to use) without fabricating answers. We are talking about a speeding ticket, so there isn't much for them to ask the defendant. This company looks for technicalities, so it seems like they would be focusing on certifications and training and maintenance records for the radar gun, etc. Rules about cell phones being turned off are mainly to avoid disruptions. They might have found a judge willing to allow the test to move forward, provided the ringer is turned off and other potential disruptions are mitigated.

[@phydeux]

Steve, the AI can tell who's who the same way you or I would listening to a recording of a trial. If you know courtroom procedure you'll know the sequence of events, and you'll be able to pick up context clues like when someone says "your Honor" you'll know that the person they are addressing is the judge. And if the judge asks, "does the state...." you know the response will be coming from the prosecution. And an AI that's been fed transcripts and recordings of numerous trials will be able to pick up on those patterns and cues just as well as a human, and often faster. Though I do think more complex trials where you have multiple defendants and/or second and third chair lawyers could become difficult for the AI to detect. But if we get to that point they will probably allow the party using the AI to interact with the AI and provide disambiguation responses.

[@pcdude2394]

Imagine the government starts to replace Judges with A.I. We’re gonna be totally screwed.

[@avi8r66]

So as I understand it one of the reasons to have an attorney speak on your behalf is so that you yourself aren't the one speaking because there is a difference legally between certain things being said from your lips vs an advocate.

[@BigRalphSmith]

I would simply run a bunch of mock trials. I'm sure that the developers have and are already doing this. It would be necessary for training the AI anyway.

[@musicloverme3993]

Judge: Are you being represented by counsel today? Defendant: Yes, your honor. [holding up cell phone]

[@arnoldfossman1701]

If I was using a robo-lawyer I wouldn't answer questions with whatever it says I should.

[@BigRalphSmith]

In response to Steve's first question, an AI would have no difficulty keeping track of identities based only on voice. The AI can do something in real time that a person can't, analyze voice prints. Along these lines, an AI could do something else in real time that a person can't; analyze voice stress patterns as an indicator of deceptive responses.

[@douganderson1249]

Voice recognition wouldn't be difficult - I think all it would take is human intervention and after some voice samples it would know but court rooms can have a lot of echos as well so the mic would need to be a high quality mic. The BIG issue is something you pointed out - telling your client HOW to answer a question another might be WHO the question is being directed at. This technology would be a great thing to get the best result possible if perfected. For example compare computer chess vs the best humans alive and the AI chess engines can dominate the best GM's in the world. IF it gets to a point where it's allowed in court rooms even if only in advisory capacity to a lawyer it could be the best thing. Imagine being able to search ALL case law, pertinent precedents, and statutes in seconds and advise your lawyer (OR the prosecution , and / or the Judge). Or it could turn the judicial system into a real sh*t show!

[@heywaitaminute1984]

Unless it's Lt. Commander Data, I wouldn't use a robot for court.

[@workingfolk]

"Would counsel please approach the bench?"

[@JP-mu3xl]

Exactly! How about STOP breaking the law!!