AI, TECHNOLOGY

AI Victim Statements

⏱ Estimated Read Time: 3 minutes

Yo, AI victim statements. This is a new one for me, and I’m very much all over the place when it comes to AI. Don’t get me wrong, there are times when I’m going to be like, “Yo, I hate this thing,” and other times like, “Huh?” And still other times I think you guys are being weird because AI is a big part of my job now. I use AI a lot, and then I hate AI a lot. This is one of those cases where I’m like, why are we using AI?

So, in Arizona, someone was sentenced to 10 and a half years for a road rage incident where they murdered Chris Pelky. That’s pretty straightforward. You murder a guy, the judge sees the trial, they see the evidence, and then they’re like, “Fair enough, you killed a guy. Here’s your sentence.” Now, where it gets interesting is during the victim statements. Victim statements are something that happens at the end of the trial where the families of the victims get a chance to speak their peace, to say how they feel. Sometimes they say, “I hate you.” Sometimes they say, “I don’t know how I feel.” Sometimes they just say, “I miss you.” They’re all over the place. I don’t know how much they’re actually used when weighing the judgment, but they’re something that is allowed.

What happened in this case is the family of the victim, Chris Pelky, work in AI. They decided that their victim statements weren’t near as impressive as what Chris Pelky would want to say, but Chris Pelky, mind you, is dead. He didn’t say anything about this. So, what they did was they reanimated Chris Pelky with AI. They brought his voice, they brought his video, and they used their words in his tone. They gave a statement that was, like, “I’m a forgiving guy. I really wish that we didn’t meet under these circumstances. I hope for leniency and I kind of forgive you.” Because they’re like, that’s the type of guy Chris was. I understand that, but it’s still so strange to me.

So, they’re using an AI. They brought his voice back. They reanimated his image to deliver the statement. It was a very powerful image, everyone apparently has reported. And I can imagine it was, but what if they said the other thing, like, “I hate you. This is what you did. You ruined my life. You stole this from me.” Then what? Would that change how we feel? No, this is just no.

I’m already pretty against reanimating people of the past, bringing them back to life. I saw this years ago when people brought back Tupac and the Kardashian’s father, and they were doing like, “Now loved ones can…” and we’ve seen these AIs where you post a picture and it kind of reanimates someone who may have passed away. You upload a bunch of audio of them, and all of a sudden you can have conversations with them, bring their voice back. I just don’t like it. When someone passes, they pass, you got to accept it. I’ve just never been a fan of this kind of thing.

But then using this in court to deliver an emotional appeal of something that’s not real is fiction. It’s strange. No, don’t do it. That’s where I’m at. I don’t know. Do you guys disagree with me? Am I off the rocket for this one? You can’t have a murder victim AI version of them speaking at their trial. No. That just opens this whole Pandora’s box of manipulation and fake stuff. No, just cut it out. That’s it. I understand and respect and I’m sorry for your loss, but no, no, no, no, no. That’s it. We got to learn as a society how to grieve, how to let go, how to move on. This using AI, like, no. Just no. Anyways, y’all let me know in the comments.

View On:

updated_at 31-07-2025
Ai Disclosure: The above posts were transcribed using AI tools. Some language may not have been accurately transcribed.
Ai Header Image Prompt: High resolution, deeply detailed digital painting, blending elements of abstract digital art, ethereal surrealism, and subtle glitch aesthetics. The central focus is a spectral, translucent human silhouette, composed of fragmented light, swirling data streams, and distorted pixels, subtly coalescing into a phantom-like bust or head-and-shoulders. This digital apparition appears to materialize within a dimly lit, deconstructed, and abstract representation of a formal, somber space, hinting at a courtroom or legal chamber through architectural suggestions rather than overt details. Muted cool blues, deep purples, and grays dominate the color palette, contrasted by glowing accents of electric blue and vibrant data trails that emanate from and surround the figure. The overall mood is one of profound contemplation, unsettling artificiality, and the blurred line between presence and absence. Emphasize a painterly digital texture and subtle imperfections to avoid an overtly sterile AI appearance. The human form is intentionally non-detailed and diffuse to maintain abstraction and avoid rendering specific features like hands or fingers.