June 15, 2026 • 14 mins
On the Jim Colbert Show Attorney "Friendly" Ray Traendly of TK Law discusses a story of a Florida man suing Jacksonville police over a wrongful arrest due to A.I. error.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome back.
Speaker 2 (00:00):
I'm Jim.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
There's Barbara.
Speaker 2 (00:01):
Hello. Jack is here as well. And every single Monday
around this time we have a good friend drop by.
He runs TK Law one firm for life dot Com.
Two offices guys right here in Longwood, also in DeLand.
Give it up for the very awesome mister Ray Trinley.
I'm here.
Speaker 1 (00:18):
Just yea, was it?
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Babs?
Speaker 1 (00:22):
I like that? How you doing, buddy? Oh good? How
are you good man? Good weekend? Everything good, everything good.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
Spending time with the kiddos, just trying to keep them
out of my wife's hair, you know, summertime, so she's
a teacher. She's off with them and has no escape.
Speaker 1 (00:36):
And that's very cool of you.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Yeah, I think goes a long way with mama's By
the way, even just six hours so they can go
to the bathroom without some kid, you know, scratching at
the door or sitting at their feet while they go
to the bathroom is wonderful.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
Yeah, But you don't have to promise every time I
take him out of the house, I'm going to bring
him back alive. And sometimes it's a it's a crapshoe
whether that's gonna happen, and.
Speaker 1 (00:58):
You actually told me something cool.
Speaker 2 (00:59):
You take your kids bass Pro so they can look
at the fish tank, because oh yeah, for people who
haven't been there, they have a fish tank in the
middle of Bass Pro that you can literally fish in.
They swim in it. They do demos and stuff, catching
fish and stuff. But it's pretty bad ass.
Speaker 3 (01:11):
It's a great fish tank and they always have they
have different fish in there.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
So they had some some snakeheadfish inside it, and so
you know, those are cool. I used to catch them
when I was a kid, you know, fishing in the
canals in South Florida. So I had some of those,
and they had some monster red fish and stuff. So
it was a good good time.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
Yeah, man, that's awesome. Yeah, I used to.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
I was telling you that when I was dead broke
after my divorce, I would take my kids and we
would do Walmart scavenger hunts because I had no money
to do anything, and I would just make a list
of stuff that was really hard to find in the
store and you kind of send them out there and
the first one that came out with their basket that
had all the stuff got like a prize. Well we could, honestly,
and it was like a bag of Eminem's. I was
so broke.
Speaker 3 (01:51):
I like the idea of doing that, but then like
picking items that they couldn't actually find in the store.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
Or items that don't even get sold they don't get
sold there, and then just go to the golf course.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
That's a right. Oh you guys didn't find everything. Sorry,
all right?
Speaker 2 (02:05):
Ray drops by on Mondays talk about some legal things
happening out there. Usually would be a story maybe we
pull from the news, or maybe something that went through
the firm that we can talk about. What do you
have first today, Buddy.
Speaker 3 (02:14):
Well, this is an interesting spin on some stories we've
been doing recently. That a Florida man. That's how most
of these stories start. Florida man is suing this AI
in the city of Jacksonville. Oh, this is the mistaken
identity identity they the story is really interesting. So I
(02:37):
saw the story last week with just a little bit
of kind of like a superficial old news story, but
I actually looked at the law student reviewed it all Man,
it's interesting. So here's what happens. This guy's at the beach,
goes home hanging out with his family. A couple of
days later, knock knock, police of the warrant come in,
(02:59):
asked him, uh, say that he was part of this
this crime and that you know.
Speaker 4 (03:06):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (03:06):
They claim that they have eyewitness identification and he gets arrested.
Come to find out, you know, with you know, irrefutable evidence,
he couldn't have been there. He wasn't there. And so
you know, you read the story and it's how everything
happened was uh Ai did a facial recognition and his
(03:29):
facial facial recognition technology picked him out as a person
using the faces.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
Uh, the facial recognition, the.
Speaker 3 (03:39):
Facial recognition, they have a database called faces, and they
picked his face out and they said, this is the guy.
And then law enforcement said, okay, what we're gonna do
is we're gonna find six people that look just like
this guy for the photo array. Not actually looking at
the video camera footage. They used this guy's image for
the photo array. The eyewitness picked him out and said
(04:04):
that's the guy.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
Well that's double I D.
Speaker 2 (04:07):
Right, So the AI ed you and then a witness
IDSU and for a cop that is as solid as
it gets, right.
Speaker 3 (04:13):
Well, apparently that's all they needed, and so they go
they get a warrant. A warrant they gets issued by
the judge. A guy gets arrested and come to find
out that nobody actually reviewed the security footage that was
run through the AI program, the ficial recognition program, and
so had they done that, they would have realized that
the person in question looked nothing like this guy?
Speaker 1 (04:37):
Right? And didn't they keep this cat in jail for
quite a bit?
Speaker 3 (04:40):
For a couple of days?
Speaker 1 (04:41):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (04:41):
Was?
Speaker 1 (04:42):
I thought? How many was it? Deborah?
Speaker 2 (04:43):
Do you remember the story? I read it in the Yeah,
I thought it was more than a couple. Dude, I
thought they kept this.
Speaker 5 (04:48):
Was like thirteen days or something like that.
Speaker 3 (04:50):
I thought they kept him for a minute, man, I mean,
that's a good time to spending, you know, accusing.
Speaker 5 (04:56):
Him of luring a child to McDonald's.
Speaker 3 (04:58):
Using U, using whatever you can for leverage and for
money and jail. So anyway, so rough story for this guy.
So he ends up following a lawsuit against the City
of Jacksonville asking for them to no longer use his
facial recognition technology and to implement some safeguards. And he's
(05:18):
also assuing the officers involved because they didn't do their
due diligence right inspecting the footage, and so it's interesting.
It's an interesting story against it's a slight variation on
some of these AI cases that we've seen recently.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
And the thing that kills me when you read the story,
isn't this the guy who who? Is he from Fort Myers?
Because the cases in jackson So he was arrested in
Jacksonville for sure? Was it at his home or was
it a come because there was another story about a
guy who was like, you know, he was at work
in the entire time. And what kills me about the
situations like that, it's so easy to verify where the
person was rather than I mean, if you're to listen
(05:57):
to a witness and then of course watch the AI
and listen to the AI. I mean, wouldn't you have
to at least investigate his story?
Speaker 3 (06:05):
Well, and that's that's part of what he's saying, is
you should have done all that before he arrested me.
Speaker 5 (06:11):
Yeah, it is a Fort Myers man, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (06:13):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (06:13):
He was four hundred miles away at work when they
said this thing happened. Yeah, So, I mean it would
have been so easy to verify exactly what was going on. Man,
I mean, it's so crazy, and I mean, this is
obviously just the.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
Beginning of this for us, right well, and that's kind
of the reason why I brought it up is, you know,
it's a slight variation on some of these cases where
we've seen people really just use AI to do whatever
the job is and not have a lot of oversight.
And there's just this big fear I think that a
lot of people have the AI is going to take
over and that nobody's gonna have jobs. But what we
see it time and time again where it's making these
(06:46):
mistakes costing people their lives or.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
Liberty and eventually, how long will it take for either governments,
whether it be local, local governments or state or federal
governments to pay lawsuits? How many lawsuits are they gonna
have to pay out before they look at AI and go, well,
maybe we use this as a tool and not the
definitive tool to decide when people's liberties are taken away,
(07:11):
Because I mean, that's really what we're talking about here, right,
I Mean, when you look at the liability of this,
this guy's.
Speaker 1 (07:15):
Gonna sue and you know he's gonna win.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
I think he's got pretty darky case. Now we know
that for a fact. I mean he's gonna win. I mean,
how many of these cases Eventually, I guess police departments, states,
whatever the case of MEA, we're gonna wake up and go, well, look,
let's use this as.
Speaker 1 (07:28):
A beginning point.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
Sure, and then if this thing is able to even
get us maybe eighty percent real you know, eighty percent
success rate. I mean we can factor the other twenty
percent with human stuff, and maybe we can do that,
but I mean, maybe cut down on the time the
investigation takes well.
Speaker 3 (07:43):
And I think, you know, like what we're seeing in
the legal field right now is that lawyers have to
certify if any AI has been used, that they've independently
verified the information and things like that, and I think
that that will be the trend. And I think you're right.
It's gonna take a couple of these lawsuits where courts
come down and hold you know, whether it's these cities
or municipalities responsible and liable for these these issues, that eventually,
(08:06):
through the court system, the legislature is going to then
implement rules and say, okay, the courts are going to
hold our feet to the fire. If we don't do this,
we have to have reasonable safeguards and at least that
protects them from some of these claims for failure to
train and failure to protect you know, their citizens.
Speaker 2 (08:23):
I mean, think about the services you provide for your clients.
In a million years. I know you well enough to
know you would never lean on AI to provide a
definitive argument for a case. Now, you may use it
as a tool to investigate. You may do that just
to cut down on time, but you are never in
a million years are going to allow that to form
your argument for somebody's you know, for whatever the case
(08:44):
may be, a divorce, freedom and arrest, whatever the case is.
Speaker 4 (08:47):
And yet we've seen in some cases where lawyers have
leaned on AI to help them, you know, come up
with closing arguments, only to have the AI hallucinate.
Speaker 3 (08:59):
Yes, st acquording case this is it don't even exist. Yeah, well,
i'll tell you on that experiment. I got approached by
a company who wanted me to use their AI, who
could basically do case law research. And so there's an
issue that I know pretty well. I've had oral arguments
in front of the appellate courts on the issue. So
I do it pretty much inside and out all the cases,
(09:20):
and so I put that prompt into the AI and said,
give me the cases that you think and it missed
some really simple foundational issues that I was surprised by.
This is recent, this is one of the more up
to date, you know, large language models that they're using,
and it's just it's not perfect. And I think that
the it could do some really cool things in medical technology.
(09:41):
But again we're seeing these doctors having to independently verify
their findings. They can't just say, oh, this looks like
a mass, it's definitely cancer, are definitely not cancer without
doing some additional research, and.
Speaker 2 (09:52):
The nuance of the law is going to be certainly
missed on a machine like that. There, the nuance of
these arguments can be so crazy that there's no way
possible that the AI could pick up on the human
nature of those things that argue human cases, right, I mean,
it's just it's not it's really silly to ask it
to do that, because there are so many different aspects
(10:14):
when you're arguing a case or or you know, are
talking about someone's case, that will never if it's it's
not a one or a zero, right, you know, it's
a half of one of those, or like it's a
there's a lot of gray before it gets black.
Speaker 3 (10:26):
Well, and actually that's what I was gonna say, is
what I've been saying to people is that AI is
black and white, right, And unfortunately that misses out in
all the nuance of gray, and we know there's a
lot of gray in the law, and so so it's
just it's another interesting case about you know, how we're
using technology, and I think you hit the nail on
the head. There's gonna be a couple of these cases
(10:47):
where these cities are going to be paying out a
couple of million dollars at a pop, and then they're
going to realize pretty fast we got to implement some
kind of safeguards.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
How bound are you at your firm over there at
TK Law to let your customers know that AI isn't you?
I mean, is that something that you actually go out
of your way? Do customers ask you that? Or using
AI or research or O my case, does that ever
come up?
Speaker 3 (11:09):
I think I think our firmatage just saying this because
I'm tooting my own horn. I think we're a little
bit on the cutting edge of how to use AI
and how not to use AI. I've been approached by
some other doctors and lawyers who have similar concerns about
using AI appropriately and they've asked for our AI policy,
our usage policy. But we send letters to clients and
(11:30):
how they should and shouldn't use AI. It's very collaborative
in the sense of, uh, they need to be letting
me know what they want to put into AI, and
we need to talk about it. But it's very restrictive
on what it gets input. It's very much a sanitized
version of whatever the situation is. But I know people
(11:53):
you know that just dump whole contracts or dump whole
lawsuits inside the AI and say tell me the answer, yes,
and it doesn't come out the way they expect it to.
Speaker 1 (12:01):
Do you have clients that ask you? Do you have
clients that asked you to use it?
Speaker 2 (12:08):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (12:09):
All the time.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
Yeah, really yeah, people say hey or they say hey,
look I typed my case into AI and it said
this should happen.
Speaker 3 (12:19):
I mean, do you get that a lot? Yes, that
also happens. I just I'll tell you example. I had
a case where I'm taking over post trial to try
to have some post trial relief for my client. And
it was a three day trial transcript, which is something
like nine hundred and ninety something pages SAM with size
(12:39):
eleven fonts, and so he's like, hey, I'm just gonna
dump this into AI and summarize all the issues for you.
And I was like, please don't do that. And I've
you know, cited back to our our air policy and
he's like, oh, I already did. And so I looked
at him, because it's already done. So I looked at
what they came up with, and I looked at my
notes and it missed probably three or four issues that
(13:02):
are probably some of the strongest issues in this case.
Speaker 1 (13:05):
Very good teaching moment for somebody out there, right.
Speaker 3 (13:07):
And I said, hey, listen, you spent a couple grand
on me doing this, but I might now save you
like two million dollars, right, yeah, yeah, So think about
it from this perspective, you might win. Now.
Speaker 2 (13:17):
Good thing you were able to hire me. I could
only imagine, I mean, you could see clients coming in
and saying, hey, look I need to get a divorce
blah blah blah blah blah. And look, I punched everything
that's going on in my situation and the AI all
the money, all the assets and everything, and this is
what it says I should be paying for alimony. This
is what it says I should be paying for child support.
(13:37):
This is what it says we should get individually. And
I bet they think when they come in and throw
that down that they're so ahead of the game and
no idea that they are not even close.
Speaker 1 (13:46):
To the game.
Speaker 3 (13:47):
You know, maybe one day gets better, but right now,
I think it's giving a lot of people bad information
and false hope and false hope or maybe a lot
of extra stress that they don't need, right, you know,
again it's black and white. Yeah, and what it's missing
is the nuance of life. Actually, this particular judge, really
real rules on this particular issue this way right, and
(14:09):
they just it doesn't know.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
And AI would never pick up on that, on the
history of how a judge rules, or if this person
is more like, you know, harder on domestic cases or
something like that, it would never know that.
Speaker 1 (14:22):
Wow. Incredible always good See you, Bud, You see you.
That's right.
Speaker 2 (14:24):
Certainly one firm for Life dot Com. That's TK Law
offices in Longwood and DeLand. Will be a few more
minutes with Ray when we get back. Deb got some news.
Speaker 4 (14:31):
Yeah, we're gonna talk about a skydiving plane that crashed
in Missouri closer to home, a shocking update in the
cruise ship killing, and a country star launches a coffee line.
Speaker 5 (14:41):
We'll talk about that next during You heard it here first,
you got it.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
To take little break, we'll come back and get Deb's
news and get the hell out here on a Monday
Welcome back.
Speaker 2 (00:00):
I'm Jim.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
There's Barbara.
Speaker 2 (00:01):
Hello. Jack is here as well. And every single Monday
around this time we have a good friend drop by.
He runs TK Law one firm for life dot Com.
Two offices guys right here in Longwood, also in DeLand.
Give it up for the very awesome mister Ray Trinley.
I'm here.
Speaker 1 (00:18):
Just yea, was it?
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Babs?
Speaker 1 (00:22):
I like that? How you doing, buddy? Oh good? How
are you good man? Good weekend? Everything good, everything good.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
Spending time with the kiddos, just trying to keep them
out of my wife's hair, you know, summertime, so she's
a teacher. She's off with them and has no escape.
Speaker 1 (00:36):
And that's very cool of you.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Yeah, I think goes a long way with mama's By
the way, even just six hours so they can go
to the bathroom without some kid, you know, scratching at
the door or sitting at their feet while they go
to the bathroom is wonderful.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
Yeah, But you don't have to promise every time I
take him out of the house, I'm going to bring
him back alive. And sometimes it's a it's a crapshoe
whether that's gonna happen, and.
Speaker 1 (00:58):
You actually told me something cool.
Speaker 2 (00:59):
You take your kids bass Pro so they can look
at the fish tank, because oh yeah, for people who
haven't been there, they have a fish tank in the
middle of Bass Pro that you can literally fish in.
They swim in it. They do demos and stuff, catching
fish and stuff. But it's pretty bad ass.
Speaker 3 (01:11):
It's a great fish tank and they always have they
have different fish in there.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
So they had some some snakeheadfish inside it, and so
you know, those are cool. I used to catch them
when I was a kid, you know, fishing in the
canals in South Florida. So I had some of those,
and they had some monster red fish and stuff. So
it was a good good time.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
Yeah, man, that's awesome. Yeah, I used to.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
I was telling you that when I was dead broke
after my divorce, I would take my kids and we
would do Walmart scavenger hunts because I had no money
to do anything, and I would just make a list
of stuff that was really hard to find in the
store and you kind of send them out there and
the first one that came out with their basket that
had all the stuff got like a prize. Well we could, honestly,
and it was like a bag of Eminem's. I was
so broke.
Speaker 3 (01:51):
I like the idea of doing that, but then like
picking items that they couldn't actually find in the store.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
Or items that don't even get sold they don't get
sold there, and then just go to the golf course.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
That's a right. Oh you guys didn't find everything. Sorry,
all right?
Speaker 2 (02:05):
Ray drops by on Mondays talk about some legal things
happening out there. Usually would be a story maybe we
pull from the news, or maybe something that went through
the firm that we can talk about. What do you
have first today, Buddy.
Speaker 3 (02:14):
Well, this is an interesting spin on some stories we've
been doing recently. That a Florida man. That's how most
of these stories start. Florida man is suing this AI
in the city of Jacksonville. Oh, this is the mistaken
identity identity they the story is really interesting. So I
(02:37):
saw the story last week with just a little bit
of kind of like a superficial old news story, but
I actually looked at the law student reviewed it all Man,
it's interesting. So here's what happens. This guy's at the beach,
goes home hanging out with his family. A couple of
days later, knock knock, police of the warrant come in,
(02:59):
asked him, uh, say that he was part of this
this crime and that you know.
Speaker 4 (03:06):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (03:06):
They claim that they have eyewitness identification and he gets arrested.
Come to find out, you know, with you know, irrefutable evidence,
he couldn't have been there. He wasn't there. And so
you know, you read the story and it's how everything
happened was uh Ai did a facial recognition and his
(03:29):
facial facial recognition technology picked him out as a person
using the faces.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
Uh, the facial recognition, the.
Speaker 3 (03:39):
Facial recognition, they have a database called faces, and they
picked his face out and they said, this is the guy.
And then law enforcement said, okay, what we're gonna do
is we're gonna find six people that look just like
this guy for the photo array. Not actually looking at
the video camera footage. They used this guy's image for
the photo array. The eyewitness picked him out and said
(04:04):
that's the guy.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
Well that's double I D.
Speaker 2 (04:07):
Right, So the AI ed you and then a witness
IDSU and for a cop that is as solid as
it gets, right.
Speaker 3 (04:13):
Well, apparently that's all they needed, and so they go
they get a warrant. A warrant they gets issued by
the judge. A guy gets arrested and come to find
out that nobody actually reviewed the security footage that was
run through the AI program, the ficial recognition program, and
so had they done that, they would have realized that
the person in question looked nothing like this guy?
Speaker 1 (04:37):
Right? And didn't they keep this cat in jail for
quite a bit?
Speaker 3 (04:40):
For a couple of days?
Speaker 1 (04:41):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (04:41):
Was?
Speaker 1 (04:42):
I thought? How many was it? Deborah?
Speaker 2 (04:43):
Do you remember the story? I read it in the Yeah,
I thought it was more than a couple. Dude, I
thought they kept this.
Speaker 5 (04:48):
Was like thirteen days or something like that.
Speaker 3 (04:50):
I thought they kept him for a minute, man, I mean,
that's a good time to spending, you know, accusing.
Speaker 5 (04:56):
Him of luring a child to McDonald's.
Speaker 3 (04:58):
Using U, using whatever you can for leverage and for
money and jail. So anyway, so rough story for this guy.
So he ends up following a lawsuit against the City
of Jacksonville asking for them to no longer use his
facial recognition technology and to implement some safeguards. And he's
(05:18):
also assuing the officers involved because they didn't do their
due diligence right inspecting the footage, and so it's interesting.
It's an interesting story against it's a slight variation on
some of these AI cases that we've seen recently.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
And the thing that kills me when you read the story,
isn't this the guy who who? Is he from Fort Myers?
Because the cases in jackson So he was arrested in
Jacksonville for sure? Was it at his home or was
it a come because there was another story about a
guy who was like, you know, he was at work
in the entire time. And what kills me about the
situations like that, it's so easy to verify where the
person was rather than I mean, if you're to listen
(05:57):
to a witness and then of course watch the AI
and listen to the AI. I mean, wouldn't you have
to at least investigate his story?
Speaker 3 (06:05):
Well, and that's that's part of what he's saying, is
you should have done all that before he arrested me.
Speaker 5 (06:11):
Yeah, it is a Fort Myers man, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (06:13):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (06:13):
He was four hundred miles away at work when they
said this thing happened. Yeah, So, I mean it would
have been so easy to verify exactly what was going on. Man,
I mean, it's so crazy, and I mean, this is
obviously just the.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
Beginning of this for us, right well, and that's kind
of the reason why I brought it up is, you know,
it's a slight variation on some of these cases where
we've seen people really just use AI to do whatever
the job is and not have a lot of oversight.
And there's just this big fear I think that a
lot of people have the AI is going to take
over and that nobody's gonna have jobs. But what we
see it time and time again where it's making these
(06:46):
mistakes costing people their lives or.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
Liberty and eventually, how long will it take for either governments,
whether it be local, local governments or state or federal
governments to pay lawsuits? How many lawsuits are they gonna
have to pay out before they look at AI and go, well,
maybe we use this as a tool and not the
definitive tool to decide when people's liberties are taken away,
(07:11):
Because I mean, that's really what we're talking about here, right,
I Mean, when you look at the liability of this,
this guy's.
Speaker 1 (07:15):
Gonna sue and you know he's gonna win.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
I think he's got pretty darky case. Now we know
that for a fact. I mean he's gonna win. I mean,
how many of these cases Eventually, I guess police departments, states,
whatever the case of MEA, we're gonna wake up and go, well, look,
let's use this as.
Speaker 1 (07:28):
A beginning point.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
Sure, and then if this thing is able to even
get us maybe eighty percent real you know, eighty percent
success rate. I mean we can factor the other twenty
percent with human stuff, and maybe we can do that,
but I mean, maybe cut down on the time the
investigation takes well.
Speaker 3 (07:43):
And I think, you know, like what we're seeing in
the legal field right now is that lawyers have to
certify if any AI has been used, that they've independently
verified the information and things like that, and I think
that that will be the trend. And I think you're right.
It's gonna take a couple of these lawsuits where courts
come down and hold you know, whether it's these cities
or municipalities responsible and liable for these these issues, that eventually,
(08:06):
through the court system, the legislature is going to then
implement rules and say, okay, the courts are going to
hold our feet to the fire. If we don't do this,
we have to have reasonable safeguards and at least that
protects them from some of these claims for failure to
train and failure to protect you know, their citizens.
Speaker 2 (08:23):
I mean, think about the services you provide for your clients.
In a million years. I know you well enough to
know you would never lean on AI to provide a
definitive argument for a case. Now, you may use it
as a tool to investigate. You may do that just
to cut down on time, but you are never in
a million years are going to allow that to form
your argument for somebody's you know, for whatever the case
(08:44):
may be, a divorce, freedom and arrest, whatever the case is.
Speaker 4 (08:47):
And yet we've seen in some cases where lawyers have
leaned on AI to help them, you know, come up
with closing arguments, only to have the AI hallucinate.
Speaker 3 (08:59):
Yes, st acquording case this is it don't even exist. Yeah, well,
i'll tell you on that experiment. I got approached by
a company who wanted me to use their AI, who
could basically do case law research. And so there's an
issue that I know pretty well. I've had oral arguments
in front of the appellate courts on the issue. So
I do it pretty much inside and out all the cases,
(09:20):
and so I put that prompt into the AI and said,
give me the cases that you think and it missed
some really simple foundational issues that I was surprised by.
This is recent, this is one of the more up
to date, you know, large language models that they're using,
and it's just it's not perfect. And I think that
the it could do some really cool things in medical technology.
(09:41):
But again we're seeing these doctors having to independently verify
their findings. They can't just say, oh, this looks like
a mass, it's definitely cancer, are definitely not cancer without
doing some additional research, and.
Speaker 2 (09:52):
The nuance of the law is going to be certainly
missed on a machine like that. There, the nuance of
these arguments can be so crazy that there's no way
possible that the AI could pick up on the human
nature of those things that argue human cases, right, I mean,
it's just it's not it's really silly to ask it
to do that, because there are so many different aspects
(10:14):
when you're arguing a case or or you know, are
talking about someone's case, that will never if it's it's
not a one or a zero, right, you know, it's
a half of one of those, or like it's a
there's a lot of gray before it gets black.
Speaker 3 (10:26):
Well, and actually that's what I was gonna say, is
what I've been saying to people is that AI is
black and white, right, And unfortunately that misses out in
all the nuance of gray, and we know there's a
lot of gray in the law, and so so it's
just it's another interesting case about you know, how we're
using technology, and I think you hit the nail on
the head. There's gonna be a couple of these cases
(10:47):
where these cities are going to be paying out a
couple of million dollars at a pop, and then they're
going to realize pretty fast we got to implement some
kind of safeguards.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
How bound are you at your firm over there at
TK Law to let your customers know that AI isn't you?
I mean, is that something that you actually go out
of your way? Do customers ask you that? Or using
AI or research or O my case, does that ever
come up?
Speaker 3 (11:09):
I think I think our firmatage just saying this because
I'm tooting my own horn. I think we're a little
bit on the cutting edge of how to use AI
and how not to use AI. I've been approached by
some other doctors and lawyers who have similar concerns about
using AI appropriately and they've asked for our AI policy,
our usage policy. But we send letters to clients and
(11:30):
how they should and shouldn't use AI. It's very collaborative
in the sense of, uh, they need to be letting
me know what they want to put into AI, and
we need to talk about it. But it's very restrictive
on what it gets input. It's very much a sanitized
version of whatever the situation is. But I know people
(11:53):
you know that just dump whole contracts or dump whole
lawsuits inside the AI and say tell me the answer, yes,
and it doesn't come out the way they expect it to.
Speaker 1 (12:01):
Do you have clients that ask you? Do you have
clients that asked you to use it?
Speaker 2 (12:08):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (12:09):
All the time.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
Yeah, really yeah, people say hey or they say hey,
look I typed my case into AI and it said
this should happen.
Speaker 3 (12:19):
I mean, do you get that a lot? Yes, that
also happens. I just I'll tell you example. I had
a case where I'm taking over post trial to try
to have some post trial relief for my client. And
it was a three day trial transcript, which is something
like nine hundred and ninety something pages SAM with size
(12:39):
eleven fonts, and so he's like, hey, I'm just gonna
dump this into AI and summarize all the issues for you.
And I was like, please don't do that. And I've
you know, cited back to our our air policy and
he's like, oh, I already did. And so I looked
at him, because it's already done. So I looked at
what they came up with, and I looked at my
notes and it missed probably three or four issues that
(13:02):
are probably some of the strongest issues in this case.
Speaker 1 (13:05):
Very good teaching moment for somebody out there, right.
Speaker 3 (13:07):
And I said, hey, listen, you spent a couple grand
on me doing this, but I might now save you
like two million dollars, right, yeah, yeah, So think about
it from this perspective, you might win. Now.
Speaker 2 (13:17):
Good thing you were able to hire me. I could
only imagine, I mean, you could see clients coming in
and saying, hey, look I need to get a divorce
blah blah blah blah blah. And look, I punched everything
that's going on in my situation and the AI all
the money, all the assets and everything, and this is
what it says I should be paying for alimony. This
is what it says I should be paying for child support.
(13:37):
This is what it says we should get individually. And
I bet they think when they come in and throw
that down that they're so ahead of the game and
no idea that they are not even close.
Speaker 1 (13:46):
To the game.
Speaker 3 (13:47):
You know, maybe one day gets better, but right now,
I think it's giving a lot of people bad information
and false hope and false hope or maybe a lot
of extra stress that they don't need, right, you know,
again it's black and white. Yeah, and what it's missing
is the nuance of life. Actually, this particular judge, really
real rules on this particular issue this way right, and
(14:09):
they just it doesn't know.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
And AI would never pick up on that, on the
history of how a judge rules, or if this person
is more like, you know, harder on domestic cases or
something like that, it would never know that.
Speaker 1 (14:22):
Wow. Incredible always good See you, Bud, You see you.
That's right.
Speaker 2 (14:24):
Certainly one firm for Life dot Com. That's TK Law
offices in Longwood and DeLand. Will be a few more
minutes with Ray when we get back. Deb got some news.
Speaker 4 (14:31):
Yeah, we're gonna talk about a skydiving plane that crashed
in Missouri closer to home, a shocking update in the
cruise ship killing, and a country star launches a coffee line.
Speaker 5 (14:41):
We'll talk about that next during You heard it here first,
you got it.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
To take little break, we'll come back and get Deb's
news and get the hell out here on a Monday
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.