4 ms·
It’s really obvious you did not read anything in the article. It’s a victim impact statement. It’s not being used as evidence. State law allows for victim impac
by laughingcurve 1y ago
It’s really obvious you did not read anything in the article. It’s a victim impact statement. It’s not being used as evidence. State law allows for victim impact statements to be delivered in any manner. A family is grieving and looking for closure, but all you seem to see here is another example of AI gone amok. I cannot understand your rationale and behavior without explanation.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- snypher 1y agoThe victim of the crime is deceased. The second order victims such as family members should provide their own statements. Making an AI clone of the deceased may be an appropriate tool for the family dealing with grief but should not be used in court as an emotional manipulation tool. However it obviously worked on the judge, resulting in an extra year of sentence.