posted in Technology
Lawyer Cites ChatGPT-Invented Fake Witnesses in Murder Appeal
www.404media.co/chatgpt-fake-witnesses-testimony-stephen-aarons-new-mexico/Replying to @themachinestops@lemmy.dbzer0.com
There needs to be a rule that anyone who does this should be immediately disbarred
Replying to @finley@lemmy.zip
I mean. He should be imprisoned, no? Does perjury not apply to the lawyers too?
Replying to @AltoCuddle@lemmy.world
As far as I'm aware perjury can only be committed by someone under oath. And lawyers are not placed under oath. But I agree, the penalty for this shit should be a lot harsher than it's been so far.
Replying to @Davel23@fedia.io
I've been to court, and it never even occurred to me that the lawyers are not placed under oath. But they're the ones that do most of the talking during a case. I wonder that the reasoning for not being under oath is.
What the lawyers say is not under oath unless they go to the witness stand and swear in. The main reason is that lawyers mainly are in the court to make opinionated arguments, not to give facts.
Lawyers do have a “duty of candor” to the “tribunal” at all times, however. This is because they have taken an oath (different from the witness oath) to become “officers of the court”. This means they cannot knowingly misstate facts or law to the court.
But the maximum exposure on a duty of candor violation is court sanctions, like fines or adverse court outcomes, possibly contempt, and bar discipline, and so on. It’s not the crime of perjury.