Rape trial collapses after accuser uses AI

28 replies

IwantToRetire · 27/07/2026 19:17

The Court of Appeal ruled that such practices amount to “witness coaching”, which is strictly prohibited in the UK because of the risks of influencing testimony.

In the Lewes case, the Crown Court initially agreed that a fair trial would be impossible. However, the Court of Appeal said the case should be heard at a retrial, which should be listed at the earliest opportunity.

Full article at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/07/27/rape-trial-collapses-after-accuser-uses-ai/

And at

OP posts:

FinchiePink · 29/07/2026 07:03

SummerNocturnal · 29/07/2026 02:25

So she's asked chat gpt to sum up her experience, from what she can recall, as she was too drunk to give consent to an ex?
I don't see how that's tampering. It's like when AI summarises my emails for me, rather than my stream of consciousness BS.
So what's the analogy? Is it like when an exam scribe has to write ad verbatim what a candidate pupil dictates and mustn't change a word or improve their spelling/grammar?

Edited

No, it sounds like she's used AI to generate answers to questions in court. This isn't summarising testimony she has already written.

A good barrister will prepare you for what happens in court by telling you things like "the cross examination will be aggressive and here are some of the questions you may be asked". That is witness familiarisation and is allowed.

What they CANNOT do, and what it sounds like AI has been used for here, is to then go on to say "and here are some example answers you could give". THAT is witness coaching and is illegal.

SalmonOnFinnCrisp · 29/07/2026 07:10

Mariets · 27/07/2026 19:21

It sounds to me like she's looking for a way to make her case more believable. Why use AI unless she doesn't think she has enough proof.

What?????

How was that the occams razor conclusion?

Mine is she used AI to better articulate herself better because rape is traumatising and disorienting and she knows how unlikely a conviction is and hoped it would help her fall into the slim category of women who get "justice" via a successful a successful conviction and inappropriately short jail term.

onlytherain · 02/08/2026 01:05

MyAmpleSheep · 29/07/2026 02:23

Only 1-3% of women who have been raped achieve a conviction. That means 99% of men accused of rape walk free.

That is statistically not correct. It would be correct only if it were the case that every woman who has been raped makes a complaint.

For instance: if only 3% of women who have been raped make a complaint, and still 3% of women who had been raped achieve a conviction, then every complaint results in a conviction and no man accused of rape has walked free.

You might prefer to say that 99% of men guilty of rape go free.

Edited

Show quote history

You are right. I should have said: Of the women who claim to have been raped and reported it to the police, only 1-3% achieve a conviction. Not all the perpetrators will be identified, so the number of men who were accused of rape and walk free is actually less than 97-99%.

We should keep in mind that only a small minority (about 15%) of women who have been raped report the assault to the police.

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread