Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

dcazdavi t1_j60bts7 wrote

Reply to comment by monchota in Jail threats stop AI 'robot lawyer' from making its debut in court | Engadget by yourd00m

they should give the public defenders free access/use and training on how to use it

2

sickofthisshit t1_j60frru wrote

Public defenders don't need AI. They need enough hours in the day to help the clients they have, which means the public needs to hire enough for the caseload, not asking a hopped-up ELIZA to pretend to help.

4

dcazdavi t1_j60gsi0 wrote

public defenders don't need an assistant that can automatically provide help and decipher patterns from every legal source document that's ever been created and available to the public on other case history that's relevant to their current case?

sarcasm is not intended; i'm re-asking the question from the way i understand it.

1

sickofthisshit t1_j60i78d wrote

>decipher patterns from every legal source document that's ever been created

See, this is the stupid shit that techbros say which shows they do not have any clue at all what the practice of law is about.

Public defenders don't need to find some secret piece of law hidden deep in a vault to help their clients. They need an understanding of what the prosecution is trying to do, the evidence and witnesses and questions they will use to persuade a jury, identify the weaknesses of the case, negotiate with the prosecution if possible, find and prepare their own witnesses and evidence, understand the procedures of the court, know how to work within those procedures and motion practice to get the best possible outcome, challenge the prosecution motions and actions, effectively cross-examine witnesses, and explain things to the client and emotionally guide them through the process.

Not consult millions of lines of legal documents.

3

dcazdavi t1_j60k97z wrote

no one is proposing that this could accomplish the same results as a lawyer and it will likely never reach the same level of emotional capability and guidance; but the alternative for many who cannot afford this help is nothing at all and something is usually better than nothing.

1

sickofthisshit t1_j60l0qw wrote

No, this something is not better, this kind of shit is worse, because it can actively get clients in trouble while thinking they have help. That's why unlicensed practice of law is forbidden.

It's like sending cancer patients to faith healers or giving them fake medicine or poison.

Edit: https://twitter.com/courtneymilan/status/1618620649412624387?s=20&t=x4sD7_5Y4zXim9B5d7ZbTQ

Makes several points including that making legal filings or statements in court can cause serious problems if they are not true or if this is your only/last chance to raise important issues and you fail to do so.

Also, lawyers have to find out facts that are relevant, by knowing which facts would be important, how to establish those facts (given human imperfections like bad memory or dishonesty), and prove them to the relevant legal standard.

It's not just making the right kind of word noises.

2