Former lawyer of Trump attributes bogus AI-generated legal citations to a technological glitch
Article Rewrite:
Notorious former lawyer Michael Cohen has found himself in yet another legal predicament. It has been revealed that he accidentally used incorrect court citations in a recent legal filing, and the source of these citations was none other than Google Bard, an artificial intelligence chatbot. This incident has sparked concerns about the reliability and accuracy of AI-generated content in the legal world.
In the court filing, Cohen admitted that he had mistakenly believed the court citations he obtained from Google Bard to be genuine and reliable. However, it was later discovered that these citations were not authentic, and they were subsequently included in official court documents. This revelation has raised concerns about the lack of verification processes for AI-generated content and the implications this has for the legal system.
Another lawyer, E. Danya Perry, joined Cohen’s defense team after the motion was filed by his previous lawyer, David Schwartz. Perry, upon reviewing the document, realized that she could not verify the existence of the cited case law, prompting her to raise ethical concerns with the court.
This issue caught the attention of Judge Jesse M. Furman, who further investigated the matter. It was discovered that the cited cases did not exist in any relevant legal contexts. As a result, Furman ordered an explanation regarding how the motion referenced non-existent cases and Cohen’s involvement. This situation has significant implications for Cohen’s role as a witness in an upcoming case against Donald Trump. Cohen’s defenders argue that he should not be held responsible for the falsified citations as he relied on his lawyer’s advice without being aware of their inaccuracy.
This incident involving Cohen is not an isolated case. It highlights a broader trend of AI errors in the legal field. While AI can process large amounts of data quickly, its reliability and accuracy remain a concern. Attorney Steven Schwartz previously faced criticism for incorporating AI-generated references in legal documents, underscoring the importance of legal professionals verifying the outputs of AI tools.
In Cohen’s case, the AI-generated citations not only turned out to be irrelevant but also contradicted the main argument. This emphasizes the need for careful verification of AI-generated content in legal research to ensure the accuracy and integrity of court submissions.
As the legal community continues to integrate AI tools, it is crucial to prioritize careful verification processes. While AI can offer speed and efficiency, ensuring the accuracy of its outputs is essential to maintain the credibility of legal processes.