this post was submitted on 08 May 2025
583 points (95.3% liked)

Technology

70396 readers
3876 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

An AI avatar made to look and sound like the likeness of a man who was killed in a road rage incident addressed the court and the man who killed him: “To Gabriel Horcasitas, the man who shot me, it is a shame we encountered each other that day in those circumstances,” the AI avatar of Christopher Pelkey said. “In another life we probably could have been friends. I believe in forgiveness and a God who forgives. I still do.”

It was the first time the AI avatar of a victim—in this case, a dead man—has ever addressed a court, and it raises many questions about the use of this type of technology in future court proceedings. 

The avatar was made by Pelkey’s sister, Stacey Wales. Wales tells 404 Media that her husband, Pelkey’s brother-in-law, recoiled when she told him about the idea. “He told me, ‘Stacey, you’re asking a lot.’”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

The estate of Ronnie James Dio and Wendy Dio have entered the chat.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I could see this being used in retributive justice to help humanize victims to perpetrators but it should really be a private thing and not a means of getting a confession or shaming the perpetrator further

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

"getting a confession"? more like straight up fabricating

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I really don’t get how this is allowed.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

Watched the video, it is creepy. It is also edited. Wife seems to just have put words on her dead husband's AI.

This has not set a legal precedent. WTF.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 weeks ago

Honestly, all she's done has created history's most gaping opportunity for an appeal.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If I get killed and my family forgives the killer on my behalf I am haunting their asses so hard.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

especially if an AI ghost of you was used to exonerate the killer.

then it's your ghost VS an AI ghost

[–] [email protected] 130 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

it would have been about as respectful to use the corpse as a puppet and put up a show for the court with it.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Trial at Bernies? OK WERE DOING TRIAL AT BERNIES! This is going to be legend-wait for it....

[–] [email protected] 48 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I found this interesting. The AI said it believes in forgiveness.

"To Gabriel Horcasitas, the man who shot me, it is a shame we encountered each other that day in those circumstances," the AI Pelkey says. "In another life we probably could have been friends. I believe in forgiveness, in God who forgives, I always have. And I still do."

But the victim's sister, who created the AI did it to try to get the maximum sentence for the defendant.

The prosecution against Horcasitas was only seeking nine years for the killing. The maximum was 10 and a half years. Stacey had asked the judge for the full sentence during her own impact statement. The judge granted her request, something Stacey credits—in part—to the AI video.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, a way to play both sides of pushing for a harsh sentence whole you use a puppet to drive empathy...

Should have been a slam dunk without the video.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

This is precedent now. Wheeeeeeeee common law system.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

No it's not. Look at the court level in which it was shown.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Oh thank God.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah this wasn't ratio or even obiter, perhaps convention. Without looking deeper this was along the lines of an impact statement. Whilst it raises points for discussion its a far cry from precedent for the admission of evidence.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 2 weeks ago

This is some perverse shit

[–] [email protected] 160 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

To Gabriel Horcasitas, the man who shot me, it is a shame we encountered each other that day in those circumstances,” the AI avatar of Christopher Pelkey said. “In another life we probably could have been friends. I believe in forgiveness and a God who forgives. I still do.”

I find this nauseatingly disgusting and a disgrace that this was shown in a court of all places.

No, this man does not believe in forgiveness or a God because he's dead. He never said this, somebody wrote this script and a computer just made a video off it with his likeness.

Fuck everything about this, this should be prohibited

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

This wasn't testimony, it was an impact statement.

Impact statements are wild and crazy and this isn't surprising in anyway

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

No, this wasn't an impact statement either.

This was a huntch of pixels moved around by a huge wasteful amount of CPU power. The actual victim is dead, he can't talk and people are putting words in his mouth and it shouldn't be allowed.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

It was literally in the article explaining that this was presented as the victim impact statement.

Have you learned nothing about modern "news" ? Dont be part of the problem of spreading misinformation, be diligent and responsible. And ita okay to make mistakes, own them and move forward. Its not easy to get your information correct everytime, theres no shame in that, only in ignoring your responsibility to self correct voluntarily when you find out

Peace be upon you, we need to work together, because even though I'm calling out the inaccuracy in your comment, i do believe using this technology for this purpose is heinous

Edit: from the NPR article as its not paywalled

But the use of AI for a victim impact statement appears novel, according to Maura Grossman, a professor at the University of Waterloo who has studied the applications of AI in criminal and civil cases. She added, that she did not see any major legal or ethical issues in Pelkey's case.

"Because this is in front of a judge, not a jury, and because the video wasn't submitted as evidence per se, its impact is more limited," she told NPR via email.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"Hi, I'm Manifish_Destiny speaking to you from beyond the grave. I'm happy to say that even though I had some skepticism of AI avatars and even put something about that in my will, I just didn't understand its potential to embody my true self. But now I do, so you can disregard all that. Come to think of it, you can disregard the rest of the will as well, I've got some radical new ideas..."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

"Hey kids, this is futatorius phonin' in from the Great Beyond. Fry that fucker's ass or I'm going to haunt you and all your progeny until humankind's extinction event, and then I'll keep on messing with you in the afterlife forever!"

load more comments
view more: next ›