Behind the Digital Mask: How AI Avatars Could Help Witnesses Cheat the System

Judge Scott Schlegel Nov 25

READ IN APP

A new software I recently came across allows you to send a digital twin to video meetings while you participate from behind the scenes. The concept is simple but powerful: an AI-generated avatar appears on screen as your stand-in, professionally dressed and maintaining appropriate eye contact. While others see this polished digital version of you, you’re free to be anywhere, wearing anything, doing whatever you want off-camera. When you speak, your avatar responds with natural movements and expressions, creating a seamless illusion of presence.

For business meetings, this might be a convenient innovation. For our justice system though, it’s potentially devastating. Consider a witness testifying in a deposition or at trial through such an avatar. While their digital twin appears attentive and composed on screen, the actual witness could be surrounded by documents, receiving text messages with suggested answers, or consulting with others in the room – all serious violations of court rules. The person questioning the witness would have no idea this coaching was occurring.

Even more concerning is how this technology could undermine one of the most fundamental aspects of witness testimony: credibility assessment. Judges, juries and attorneys rely heavily on observing natural human responses during testimony. A witness’s shifting posture, nervous gestures, or momentary hesitation can speak volumes about their truthfulness. An AI avatar eliminates these crucial tells, replacing them with programmed responses that project unwavering confidence and composure, regardless of the witness’s actual demeanor.

Think about a complex commercial case where a key witness testifies about business dealings that occurred years ago. Normally, this witness might struggle to recall specific dates or transaction details without reference to documents – a natural human limitation that helps judges and juries assess credibility. With an AI avatar, this same witness could appear perfectly composed while secretly reviewing documents, chatting with colleagues, or searching through old emails, all while their digital twin maintains an appearance of spontaneous recall.

Current avatar technology isn’t perfect – there are still noticeable delays and unnatural movements that keen observers might catch. But like the evolution from early cell phones to today’s smartphones, these imperfections will likely vanish as the technology matures. Just a few months ago, a finance worker at a major company transferred $25 million after being deceived by deepfake versions of company executives on a video call. This incident serves as a stark reminder that these technologies are already sophisticated enough to fool experienced professionals.

While we may not need to sound alarms just yet, this technology’s potential impact on our legal system deserves a mention. The future often arrives sooner than we expect, and the integrity of witness testimony is too crucial to take for granted.

For more posts like this, visit www.judgeschlegel.com.