Would You Let a Robot Lawyer Defend You in Court?

A lot of what lawyers do is largely procedural: Was the document submitted on time? We're all of the I's dottted and all the T's crossed? Are there grammatical errors in a statement that allow multiple interpretations?

An AI can do much of these things with more precision and timeliness then human lawyers - especially for more or less routine case.

An AI cannot however, develop new or novel insights, or creative defenses that were not already tested and proven to work. AI systems are generally based on pattern recognition algorithms with conclusions derived from large tranches of properly chosen training data. As such, they encapsulate only what is already known, and for legal actions that are fairly standard operations they should outperform their human counterparts.

Observation 1: AI robots could be a great benefit for people requiring public defenders and probably have better overall performance then generally available.

Onservation 2: The Conservative Originalist Supreme Court Justices make decisions based upon what the intent of the framer's must have been based upon the meaning of words used from the time of the framers and the way that sentences are punctuated.The current tirades over the second amendment come from the Court's interpretation of the placement of a single comma. Other decisions have been based on interpretations of the contextual differences of the word 'that' versus the word 'which' in legal sentences.

It seems to me that the function and role of the Conservative Originalist Supreme Court Justices would be much more accurately and much more concisely be accomplished using AI robots who could use the vast library of past decisions and detailed grammatical rules to more accurately and definitely perform the full functions of the 'Originalist' Justices.

Two problems solved! Or should it be 'Two resolutions of common problems". Or possibly 'A way to repair the Supreme Court'. I could use a well trained AI to properly and definitively sort that out.

Defend me? No, no way.

However, as a tool to look up precedents, etc. sure. 

All I can say is that I remember the movie, "I, Robot" and this makes me wary when I remember the main computer system, "V.I.C.K.Y."

That being said, I would trust a robot to Govern this county much more than I now trust any member of SCOTUS, or any member of The GOP!

Would You Let a Robot Lawyer Defend You in Court?

This is a question that deserves a little thought. But certainly not a Yes or No answer. 

We are at the threshold of applying a technology that may in the next few decades replace several areas of legal services and may provide expert consultation and research services even for some of our best lawyers.

Current lawyers raised some legitimate concerns about the competency of the current iteration of Legal AI(s). Legitimate concerns must be addressed.  Hysteria, Fear, Prejudice, and Ignorance must be addressed as well.

The lede is not particularly clear how using an AI in Traffic Court would work. The lede says, "The “robot” lawyer, created by DoNotPlay, was to provide real-time legal advice through Bluetooth headphones." I think this means one would appear in court defending oneself with a well trained Traffic Law AI as an assistant. I'd be OK with being in a Beta Test Group for this knowing that, at worst, I'd have to pay the ticket. But, if I had to pay for such AI Legal Services, I would pause and decide at the time. It will probably better than any lawyer I'd be willing to pay for in that kind of legal matter. However, I would be much happier if that AI passed the Bar Exam and could actually establish expertises in arguing before a court and in Traffic Law.

I am wondering how this AI was trained and whether the current iteration be useful as a paralegal. 

I remember that one of my relatives was an independent insurance broker who would help some clients in describing traffic accidents. I was pretty young at the time and thought it was cool when he took out drawing paper, colored pencilsn and a collection of miniature cars and trucks to help explain the accident orally and in writing. An AI can certain do something similar

Also bear in mind that many people including tax preparers and accountants now rely on computerized tax preparation.

Just tell the Calimexico and NY bars organizations that these are illegal AI aliens that came across our southern border and they will be welcome with open arms and become the next protected class that nobody can talk bad about. 

I would use AI and/or robots to research a court case and then to select a lawyer to represent me in court but not to represent me in court as they wouldn't be able to respond to questioning by a judge or prosecutor nor is it currently allowed by state bars with state attorney generals threatening to sue the company DoNotPay when they tried to use the technology to represent a person with a speeding ticket in court.

DoNotPay provides the person challenging a speeding ticket smart glasses to wear that both records court proceedings and provides responses into the defendant's ear from a small speaker using text generators like ChatGPT and DaVinci.

Before AI and/or robots can be used in court state legislatures need to provide the legal framework. 

Legislation was introduced in 17 states in 2022, and enacted in CO, IL, VT, WA. CO, IL, VT  created task forces or commissions to study AI. IL  passed legislation amending its Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act initially passed in 2021. WA funded the office of the chief information officer to create a work group to determine how automated decision making systems can be reviewed, audited, updated to insure transparency, fairness & accountability.

"The first-ever AI-powered legal defense was set to take place in California on Feb. 22...various state bar officials... [sent] angry letters....Multiple state bars have threatened us...One even said a referral to the district attorney's office and prosecution and prison time would be possible."

"General artificial intelligence bills or resolutions were introduced in at least 17 states in 2022, and were enacted in Colorado, Illinois, Vermont and Washington. Colorado, Illinois and Vermont created task forces or commissions to study AI. Illinois passed legislation amending its Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act, which was initially passed in 2021. Washington provided funding for the office of the chief information officer to convene a work group to examine how automated decision making systems can be reviewed and periodically audited to ensure they are fair, transparent and accountable."

https://www.ncsl.org/technology-and-communication/legislation-related-to-artificial-intelligence

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/25/1151435033/a-robot-was-scheduled-to-argue-in-court-then-came-the-jail-threats

Ok, to defend someone a lawyer needs to create a defense strategy, be a good actor, play on emotions, pivot at any moment to elicit what they want out of a witness, and play to a judge or jury.

Before AI could do all that well enough to defend someone well, pretty sure we will have a bigger problem with the nuclear war started by Skynet. 

Have you seen "Terminator?"

I believe it's ridiculous to allow a machine to decide a human issue.  

The law is not something that can or ought to considered as a system that is simple enough for an AI computer to understand. And it is not possible for an AI computer to understand human motive, nor human emotion. Humans can represent humans, but AI computers have no business in courtrooms.

I would not hire a lawyer that did not use a computer but I would not hire a computer to be my lawyer.

Robot lawyer? We could replace The supreme court's with them, some how they would end up being corrupt or their wife's!
Rright now we have babbling artificial intelligence, Jim Jordan.  It may be an upgrade version?

There are some jobs that robots should never have. There are too many areas that no longer give personable customer service and people are left with no help or answers to concerns they might have. On that same issue, some companies do not train their employees to provide appropriate customer service and too many just give answers that do not resolve problems. Sadly, the government is probably in the Top Ten of poor customer service; for example: 'I will find out the answer and call you back,' and you never hear from them again.

2/5/23

No!!!! I would not want a damn robot to defend me in court.  Give me a real person who has a law degree and will provide an adequate defense.

I'm hoping to not need a lawyer for any court cases, but I suppose at some point this may be necessary.

I would prefer to have a human lawyer, and I think we still have plenty available at this time. 

AI has a ways to go before it is reliable, honest, and effective for such nuanced tasks as presenting a case before a judge. I'll pass.

Hell No.