An AI chatbot pushed a teen to kill himself, a lawsuit against its creator alleges - Ep. 60 - Litigation Nation

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Danessa Watkins (00:04):
Welcome to litigation nation. I'm your
host, Danessa Watkins, alongwith my co host, Jack Sanker.
And this is the show where wediscuss recent legal news and
exciting court decisions fromacross the country. Our shows
come out every 2 weeks, and youcan listen on Apple, Spotify,
YouTube, or wherever you getyour podcasts. So, Jack, what
did you find for us to discussthis week?

Jack Sanker (00:26):
Unfortunately, the tragic death of a 14 year old
boy, who'd become obsessed withan AI chatbot raises questions
about the ethical implicationsof this technology and draws a
lawsuit from the grievingparents.

Oh, boy. Well, I will say that my story is a
little lighter. I'm I'm going tocover a recent ruling at the
Georgia Supreme Court level,throwing out the contempt
conviction against attorneyBrian Steele, who is
representing young thug in acriminal Rico trial. All that
and more, here's what you needto know. In what is now Georgia

(01:06):
state's court's longest criminaltrial in history, we're
currently on month 11.
The state has brought a 56 countRico action against Jeffrey
Williams, who is a successfulrapper, otherwise known by his
stage name, Young Thug, and anumber of codefendants,
including 26 members of therecord label Young Stoner Life,

(01:27):
AKA YSL. The indictmentcharacterized YSL as a criminal
street gang alleging 182instances of participation in
gang activity and criminalconspiracies, citing both lyrics
and social media posts of thedefendants. Now many of the

(01:48):
defendants did take plea dealsearly on. So as of now, there
are only 6 defendants on trial,the district attorney, Fanny
Willis, has promised to fight,but the district attorney Fanny

(02:09):
Willis has promised to fight buthas, really, I guess, drawn some
criticism throughout the hip hopcommunity where many have argued
that this trial is just one ofmany instances of the criminal
justice system unfairly tyingrappers to violent crimes
because of their art. So thiscase has been absolutely wild

(02:33):
from the start, and I've beencovering it or following it for
a while, kinda just waitinguntil there was something that I
thought I could bring to theshow, and that happened just
recently.
So there was a ruling at theGeorgia Supreme Court level,
which threw out the contemptconviction against Young Thug's

(02:54):
attorney, Brian Steele. Now allof this started and just for a
minute, it's not common for acriminal defense attorney to be
held in contempt Right. Letalone be, you know, hauled off
in, in what do you call them?

Handcuffs?

Handcuffs. Yeah. Thank you. Handcuffs.

Litigation attorneys here. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. We're not used to that.
Yeah.
That's not the norm. So this forthis to go up to the Supreme
Court level, you know, wasobviously appropriate because
this is a rare situation. Butlet's go back. So this all
started in June, and it'ssurrounding the testimony of the
prosecutor's star witness,Kenneth Copeland, who goes by

(03:36):
Lil Woody. So Lil Woody wasoffered immunity for his
testimony, but then he refusedto take the stand when it was
his time.
So the judge at the time,Glanville, held Lil Woody in
contempt. I'm gonna have to justcall him Copeland because that's
instead of saying little. So,held Copeland in contempt and

(03:59):
called a meeting in chambersbetween him, so the judge,
Copeland, Copeland's attorneyand the prosecutors. Now this is
what we call an ex partecommunication, which essentially
is a communication between 1party in a lawsuit and the judge
without the other party present.As a general rule, and this is

(04:20):
both in criminal and civilactions, ex parte communications
with a judge are strictlyprohibited.

Especially in criminal, though. I mean, it's
it's equally bad in any othercase, but, I mean, this is, you
know, someone's right to not bein prison that we're talking
about.

Exactly. I mean, it's, you know, due
process rights. You have tomaintain the neutrality of the
judge and also just have anopportunity for both sides to
present their positions. Thereare, you know, certain rare
circumstances where ex partecommunications are allowed, but
certainly this is not one ofthem. So here the morning, one

(04:58):
of the mornings key witness metin secret.
The defense team was never toldabout the meeting, given a heads
up or anything. So they werejust showed up for trial. We're
sitting there for hours waiting.And then when court finally
We're sitting there for hourswaiting. And then when court
finally started, somehow thedefense attorney, attorney

(05:19):
Steele, he found out about themeeting.
Now he addressed this issue tothe judge in open court. He
objected to the ex parte meetingand filed an oral motion and
probably later a paper motionfor judge Glanville to recuse
himself.

Attorney Brian Steele (05:36):
Mhmm.

Now the footage of the argument that ensued
between the judge and attorneySteele is unbelievable. I have
to I'm gonna try to play theclip here. I'm hoping it'll come
through, but it's just to kindof tee it up. So attorney Steele
has just stood up to make astatement, and he revealed to
the courtroom, to make astatement, and he revealed to
the courtroom, the jury was outat the time, but everyone else

(05:59):
was in the courtroom, that ithad come to his attention that
the judge had this improper exparte meeting. And you'll hear
the judge's immediate responsewas to question how the attorney
learned about it.

Yeah.

Attorney still doesn't answer the question, but
instead starts to read case lawconfirming that all defendants
have a right to be present forcommunications with the court. I
mean, he didn't even need tocite a case for that. That's
just common knowledge. So that'swhat's happening right before
this part of the clip then ran aplay.

Judge Glanville (06:29):
Mister Williams and every other person wrongly
charged here is entitled underthe Georgia Constitution to be
present. That's critical stage.It it's just like when you meet
with me and you and mister Adamsmeet with me and others have met
with me, it's it's also ex partefor for a lot of different other
reasons, but I will I willcertainly note that for purposes
of record. While I'm goingforward, what I was told was

(06:52):
that mister Copeland said Andyou haven't answered my question
yet.

I'm not

How did you that question. You're not? No. I
will not answer that question.You not answer that question?
Because I wanna make sure thatwhat I say is accurate, and I'm
not trying to No. No. No. No.I'm asking you, how did you get
this information?
I'm not telling the court. WhatI'm saying is based upon
information Okay. Well, listen.If you don't tell me how you got
this information, then you and Iare gonna have some problems. We
can have this I have problemsright now.

Okay. I I know.

I look. I don't I don't wanna know about your
problems, okay, at this point intime. All I'm asking you at this
point in time is, how did youcome upon this information?
You're look. If the case getsreviewed, the record's gonna be
available for for for for ourappellate court and for whatever
reason, but it's disturbing thathow somehow you have
surreptitiously gotteninformation in regards to the

(07:39):
court's private ex parteconversation with the party.
I mean, I want to Yes. Witnesswho was sworn in Friday, the
court's telling this is what Iwas told. If this is not true,
not true. This court Just to getit. Asking Copelyn.
Tell me how tell me how you gotthe information. Listen.

Tell me

how you wanna do that. Tell me

how you got the information, then we can go
ahead and go forward. I'm notgonna say that. What I'm gonna
say is this. I was told, and Ihope this concerns the court. It
it concerns me that you haveproprietary information Why is
it important?
Information that that that youshould not be having that was ex
parte Why? With a party Why?State of Georgia. How about the

(08:19):
witness? How about misterCopeland who supposedly
announced he's not testifying,and he'll sit for 2 years and
then supposedly, this honorablecourt Okay.
Excuse me. Let me rephrase that.This court supposedly said, I
can hold you until the end ofthis trial. Miss Hilton
supposedly said, actually, allof the defendants and then all
26 people are disposed of. Ifthat's true, what this is is

(08:41):
coercion, witness intimidation,ex parte communications that we
have a constitutional right tobe present for.
So I understand that you'reupset towards me, but I don't
know what I did. Mister Steele,I don't wanna know. How did you
come upon this information? Whotold you? What I wanna know is
why wasn't I there?
Why Sir, I'm gonna hold you incontempt if you don't tell me
who this I'm I'm Tell me tell mewho this information is gonna

(09:04):
help. In contempt. Well, notanswering that question. That's
attorney client privilegeinformation. I am not Attorney
client privilege unless you werein my chambers.
That's the only way you canfigure out. I am telling you
what. I'm gonna give you 5minutes. If you don't tell me
who you don't have to if youdon't tell me who it is, I'm a
put you I'm I'm I'm gonna putyou in contempt because that is
not attorney client privilege.Attorney work product privilege.

(09:26):
I am not How did you how did youget that information supposedly
from my chambers? Did somebodytell you? I'm not. You should've
told me. You got 5 minutes.

Well, you

know, I don't need it. I wanna continue. Have
you got 5 minutes? This is whatI was told. Mister Koper He says
Mister Koper made statementsthat he admitted to killing
Donovan Thomas and was don'ttake my notes.
No. No. No. No. No.

I mean, wild.

Yeah. I like when he amends his statements. He
addresses the court as thiscourt and says, excuse me.
Actually, this this court

Yeah. No. Like, what a g. And then for the judge
to call proprietary information,I mean, clearly, the judge was
rattled and immediately wentinto, like, defensive mode.

A 100%.

You know? For him to say, you know, we have a
right to to these ex partecommunications with a party. I
and I don't know if this wasclear from the the audio, but,
so this the star witness for theprosecution, said he's gonna
take the 5th, said, you know,he'll do his time, essentially

(10:35):
ripping up the immunity deal.And after this meeting, decided
to take the stand. So that Imean, something happened in
chambers.

Well or or the judge could have denied and
which was the question. Thequestion was, is this true? Did
this did this indeed happen?

Yeah.

And the judge said, where did you find that out
from?

Exactly. Instead of

saying, you know, if it didn't happen, right, the
the the court could have said,you know, counsel, you're
mistaken. That that's not thathappen. You must be confused. At
which point, they probably wouldresolve the issue. Instead, the
judge is like, wait a second.
You're not supposed to knowabout that is what it seems
like.

Right. Exactly. He wants to he wants to find out
the leaks in his, you know,system.

Did the

I think it's later in this because I've seen this
clip too. It it may not havebeen in the part that you
played, but the, the attorney,request that he serve his Mhmm.
His, his contempt time with hisclients so he could prepare for
trial Yeah. Which is, like, apretty slick move.

Oh my god. I mean, this was like I we
obviously don't do criminaldefense work, but this to me is,
like, you know, you hold thisguy on a pedestal. Like, if
you're a criminal defendant, youwant a an attorney like this.

His phone has never stopped ringing after this Oh,
for sure. Out. Like, every andthis is I mean, Young Thug is
about as high profile a clientas you can get. But, like, this
I remember when this happened anot all that long ago, but maybe
a couple months ago. And Iremember, like, the amount of,
like, just people, social media,and even friends and family just

(12:02):
being like, that's who I wouldwant is my attorney

A percent. Who's willing to go to
jail for me, for willing tospend a couple of

nights in prison.

Willing to

go to jail for me,

for

willing to spend a couple of nights in prison, you
know, to protect my rights totrial, which is, I mean,
courageous.

Yeah. Well, because he knew it was wrong.

It was. But a lot of people would say, well, I'm
not going to prison for myclients.

Clients. Exactly. Yeah. No. He's so he
got a 20 day jail, sentence,which he was supposed to serve
on the weekends so that hecould, you know, continue trial.
But, yeah, when he was he gotescorted out of the courtroom in
handcuffs, and, yeah, ultimatelysaid, sure. I'll serve my time,
but it better be in the samejail as my client so we can

(12:40):
continue preparing for trial.Yeah.

That was and then I think there is a moment in the
video where, like, he, like,says that or whatever, and his
client, like, fist bumps himacross the table, and it's like
a like a pretty, like, epicmoment. You know? Mhmm. Like,
this this guy is gonna advertiseon this for the rest of his
career.

Mhmm.

Like Yeah. Yeah. And what a bad look,
obviously, too for the FultonCounty judiciary. I mean Yeah.

And it may not have even I don't know the fault. May
maybe I don't wanna take awayfrom the rest of your story, but
I don't know if it even wasnecessarily malicious or
nefarious like thatcommunication. It could have
been. I don't know. But Yeah.

I don't know.

The fact is that's the reason why ex parte
communications are prohibited.

Right. And I'm sure you've come across this
too. There have been times wheresometimes, like, an email is
sent to the judge and you leavesomebody off or whatever. And
the judge takes it uponthemselves to say, just so you
know, this communication wassent. You know, the judge is
supposed to keep like, becausesometimes things happen.
Yeah. But the judge is supposedto have that, you know, that

(13:37):
duty to then inform the otherside that this occurred.

Yeah. I mean, if you walk into the the courthouse
and you get there, you know, 10minutes early before your
hearing and the judge is sittingbehind the bench, you might just
start chatting.

And

then the moment the other lawyer walks in the room,
at least for me, you alwaysexplain, you know, counsel, we
were just chatting about, like,the the Bears game. Or Sure.

You know,

we were talking about the traffic this morning.
We weren't talking about thecase. Mhmm. Or if the case did
come up, you would immediatelygo, you know, this wasn't an
important issue, but, hey. Wesaw that there's a deadline next
week.
I was gonna suggest once you gothere that we move this deadline.

You know, something Right.

Like benign or not important. A criminal case like
this, you you wouldn't do that.

No. I mean, this this trial started late
November of 2023. So they'renow, you know, 7 months into
trial. And the

key witness for the prosecutor is
is, you know, the one that

was at issue here. So, yeah, you can't be
having communications with thatwitness Yeah. Without the other
side present. Or if you

did, you

it is incumbent on the court to be

like, you know, hey. Thanks for telling me
that information or whatever. Ihave to

now hey. Thanks for telling me that information or
whatever. I have to now share itwith the other side.

Mhmm. You know? Right. Right. It cannot

be that the other

side finds out independently.

Right. And then you

deny it. And then you take,

yeah, take

offense to Yeah. And then you put the guy in jail
for it.

Right. Yeah. I mean The the judge ought to

be, you know

Sanctioned.

Well, the judge ought to be apologizing

Right.

To counsel. Like, when this comes up, you know
what? That is what happened. Atthe moment, you know, the guy
just walked in my office andstarted talking. Right?
I can't stop someone from doingthat. Mhmm. It was ex parte. Let
me tell you everything that wentdown. We're gonna do a hearing
on this on the record outsidethe presence of the jury.

Right.

You know, I will sign an affidavit as to, like,
what was said. You do whateveryou can to make it right.

Right.

Exactly. Throw the guy in jail.

I know. Yeah. So so, obviously, the the
attorney appealed, the contempt,and, he and other defense
counsel did file the motion tohave the judge recuse himself.
That process took about 2 weeks,and then they they did take
judge Glanville off the case. Atthe Supreme Court level of

(15:46):
Georgia, this ruling just camedown.
So attorney Steele had filed a46 page long appeal, excuse me,
to the contempt conviction. Andthe the justices, they really
didn't even address much of hisarguments. They just said, look.
Judge Glanville clearly shouldhave recused himself from

(16:06):
handling the contempt charge.Like, you you cannot have that
same judge issuing, you know,this contempt.
So for that basis alone, theythrew it out. So yeah. So the
judge was removed from the case.Now to get into some of the
craziness of this of this case,and this is just tip of the
iceberg stuff. After that, judgeShikura Ingram was appointed to

(16:33):
the case, but then she had toquickly recuse herself because
one of her former deputies had aromantic involvement with

Alright.

One of the codefendants. So she's off the
case. Then there was, at somepoint, there was a 6 week
hiatus, and trial resumed againin August. Now the new presiding
judge is Paige Reese Whitaker,who I have to say I like a lot.
I've I've been listening to someof her rulings, and she's really

(17:03):
taking control of this courtroomand just enforced, you know, the
level of decorum andprofessionalism that we really
should expect from ourprofession.
She's also come down really hardon the prosecutorial team,
which, you know, in some ways isa bad look for the DA's office.
But but really, the judge isholding them to their duties.

(17:24):
And I think that that's, youknow, important for a lot of
reasons. But to that just cometo mind is that we've already
had an instance of an ex partecommunication with a prior
judge. And judge Whitaker thendid what that former judge
should have done, in a recentsituation.
There was another ex parte emailfrom the DA's office that failed
to include the defense counsel.She brought it up in open court

(17:45):
and flat out said, like, you allknow better. Like Yeah. Stop
this. Especially now, especiallyafter, you know, everything

that's already happened.

Mhmm. Yep. Nope. She called them right out
on it. And, also, I mean, thiscase is gonna hit the year mark
in November.
It takes a lot of money,taxpayer money, to prosecute a
case like this.

Yes.

And with everything that's been going on,
there are just so many potentialarguments for a mistrial,
certainly for an appeal.

Yeah. And That's the other thing is, like, I
don't know anything about themerits of the the prosecution,
but, like, good luck with thisconviction Seriously?
Withstanding Yeah. The the,like, roughly 50 appealable
issues that we just mentioned.

Right. And yeah. So judge Whitaker is
really just, I think, trying todo everything she can to right
the ship and not make, you know,the last year for, you know,
worthless. So, it's interesting.So what she did when she took
over the case, she essentiallysaid that the jury she
instructed the jury.

(18:53):
They have to ignore all theprior testimony of Lil Woody,
Copeland, that came after thatimproper ex parte meeting in
Judge's Chambers. So he had topretty much restart his
testimony. Now in another crazytwist, in mid August, Copeland's

(19:13):
attorney was unexpectedlysuspended from practicing law.

Amazing.

I wish and this this was in the middle of his
testimony. This stemmed fromunrelated issues that involved a
a 2017 child support case. Sobut this left the, you know,
testifying witness without legalrepresentation, so that, you
know, had the court scurrying totry and make sure he had

(19:39):
representation so that theycould continue. The prosecutor
had played hours of tapes ofCopeland's 2015 confessions to
the police, which implicateyoung thug and other YSL members
in a murder. However, However,when Copeland was questioned
about his prior statements, hebacktracked, said, no.

(20:00):
I was just trying to protect myfamily, and I, you know, had to
falsely implicate young thug invarious crimes. So he's now, you
know, now that he's been forcedto testify, he's going back on
every he's now, you know, nowthat he's been forced to
testify, he's going back oneverything, essentially. There
were also multiple things thateven though he testified to them

(20:21):
a few months ago, he's nowsaying, I can't recall. Now if
This

is the prosecution's star witness.

Star witness. Yes. Now if that wasn't enough,
another dramatic twist is soonafter giving all of this
testimony of I can't recall, Lilreleased a song titled, I don't
recall Amazing. Which directly

so good.

Directly references his courtroom
testimony, and does, you know,the song lyrics just echo his
repeated use of the phrase, Idon't recall, during cross
examination where he just

Listen.

You know?

There's no such thing as bad press. Right?

So, I mean, we have a jury that's gonna have to
weigh this this witness'credibility, determine whether,
you know, he's just capitalizingon his testimony or if he's
blurring these lines of his roleas a witness versus a public
figure. But, obviously, this isjust a ridiculous blow for the
prosecution team.

Yeah. I mean, a lot of this is self imposed. I mean,
you know, it it's good lawyer onon the part of the defense, it
seems like, but these are a lotof these are completely self
inflicted wounds that you just,you know, don't don't need to
do. And, like, as a prosecutor,you if you find out that a
witness has walked into thejudge's office and wants to tar
like, and you find out, you'relike, oh my god. This is

gonna blow

up my case Right. On appeal. Like, I

I am

you know, I'm prosecuting this person. This is
I'm going to run to the defenseMhmm. And tell them that this
happened. You know? I wouldimmediately do my best as the,
you know, as the prosecutor toremedy this Mhmm.
Even if the court doesn't, whichthe court should, because I'm I
I've created this massiveappellate issue. Right. So,

(22:10):
yeah, it's

Now this and judge Whitaker has more than
once shown her clear frustrationwith the prosecutors. She went
so far in in one one of the daysof trial. She essentially said,
like, this case has gone on forso many months because you are
flying by the seat of yourpants. Like, it's clear you had,

(22:32):
like, no direction in inbringing this and really, like
she ended up having to, like,stop herself and take a recess
because you could tell she was,like, holding back so much
frustration.

Right.

Because I think she sees at the end of the day,
like, this is potentially such awaste of time and money. And,
you know, it could have beenhandled so differently.

Or I mean, the other concern is that this and,
again, I don't know anythingabout the merits of the case,
but, like, a legitimate concernis that the accused are guilty.

Right. Exactly. And and you're blowing it.

Yeah. And you're blowing your opportunity to put
someone behind bars who shouldbe behind bars. And, again, I'm
not saying that's the case. Idon't know the facts.

But, yeah, that's the other side of it.
Exactly.

Yeah. So as, like, a member of the public, you
should be frustrated for allthose reasons. Like, a
basically, like a I don't wannasay frivolous prosecution, but,
like, one that is just not beingdone properly.

Mhmm.

And that's a waste of time and money that you
should be upset about. And, andslash or, this is the state's
one opportunity to address thesealleged criminal acts, and
they're blowing it. Mhmm. Soboth of those things should be
infuriating. Yeah.

Yeah. Absolutely. And then, you know,
just because I have to put my myfree speech twist on this. Mhmm.
I am just kinda digging intothis case a little bit more.
I have to say I just take issuewith this idea of

The song lyrics.

Yeah. Using an artist's work as evidence
against them in a criminaltrial. I mean, there I know New
York. I'm sure there are otherstates that have come out with
with, statutes against this.But, I mean, music artists take
on personas, like, you know,especially the rap culture,
like, they're they portraythemselves as tough streetwise,

(24:15):
you know, walking the fine line,if not jumping over the line of
criminal activity.
But, you know, do musicianswrite about real life events?
Sure. But do they also writeabout things that never actually
happened or skew the truth and,you know, tell a story in a way
that's gonna be, you know,attractive to the pa? Of course,
they do. And when I was thinkingabout this, I was like, alright.

(24:37):
Let's take it out of, you know,rap culture for a minute. What's
another genre? Country.

Sure.

Alright. Carrie Underwood. I dug my key into the
side of his pretty little soupedup 4

wheel drive.

She

might have done that. Carved my name into his
leather seats. Like, she'sliterally singing

about property damage. Yeah. So if Probably,
like, stalking

and harassment. Yeah. So if an ex boyfriend came
forward and said, you know, Idated her and then suddenly I
don't even know. My my prizedbaseball card collection got
ripped up. Like, are they gonnaplay that song in court and be
like, yuck.
This is her m o. Like, you know,but I'm just like like to take
it to that level. Like, we thinkthat's silly, but I'm sure these

(25:19):
rappers feel the same way. Like,you are you seriously holding
me, you know, accountable forthings I put out as an artist?

Yeah. I don't know. I I because I I also think that
I mean, it would depend on thespecific statements in the song
as they relate to the specificallegations of the crime.

No doubt.

If there's, like, a, you know, a part of the song
that's, like like, hi. It'syoung thug, and I committed the
following crimes on these dateswith these people, then I you
know, I think that's I do thinkthat's fair game.

Well, I

think there has to be a threshold. Right? Right.
Like, there has to be a a clear,like, evidentiary hearing of,
showing. And I don't know ifthat did or didn't happen in
this case.
So, you know, I can't say oneway or another. But,

because What's the object is it a relevance
objection then? Because it's Imean, it's not hearsay. Right?
Because it's a it's anadmission. It's so it would be,
like, a 403 type relevance.
This is more Yeah.

More damaging.

Pro

or is it unduly prejudicial

Yeah.

Compared to probative.

Right. Yeah.

I mean but that's, like, a normal thing that judges
have to deal with in every case.You know? I I I guess that would
be the ruling I'd be interestedin. I should have read it,
frankly.

Well and I don't know, like, I don't know
if this came up in pretrial inthis case or not. I would
assume, you know, this attorneyseems to know what he's doing.
So Yeah. I would think it cameup. But, but, yeah, I just I
don't know.
It's it raises red flags for mefor sure.

Right. Right. Well yeah. I mean, it's it's one of
those, like, chilling things.Like, you it could theoretically
have a chilling effect onspeech.
Right. And, you know, there'sreliability questions as well
about whether you could rely onthe that type of thing. Yeah. I
I mean, people make up things inmusic all the time for sure.

(27:01):
That said, there probably is atime and a place for it to for
the prosecutors to to use thosestatements if, like I said, if
it's, like, hyper specific.
Right?

Hyper specific. Yeah. But if you're just going
to play a bunch of songs andsay, you know, this is and and
make that, like, your characterevidence Yeah. You know, of a of
a person, it's, that, obviously,I take issue with. And, yeah,
what are we gonna do?
Like, someday, we're gonna endup with, you know, bland songs
with happy go lucky lyrics.Yeah. But, like, that's all

(27:30):
because people are gonna bescared to, you know, talk about
anything real.

Right.

Right. I don't know. I that's probably taking
it too far. I'm sure people willalways put out things, but I who
knows? I mean

Yeah. No. And this I mean, I I was thinking about,
like, the the Reasonable Doubtalbum. Like, Jay z did a whole
album about how he got off fromhis Mhmm. Criminal charges.
And it's like, you know, I Iimagine the prosecutor hearing
that being, like, damn it.

Yeah. You know? Have you seen now too, all the
the other things that are comingout about Diddy and how all of
these artists have for decadesbeen telling us

Oh, yeah.

Like

in their lyrics. Yeah. Yeah. Like, Eminem
has put out a bunch of songs oryeah. He's calling Diddy out,
and only now are we like, oh,shoot.
He was warning us. Yeah.

Oh, that's another thing.

I That's

a totally different subject.

But That's probably we'll get an episode of that
down the road because I I don'tthink that the

We need to get yeah. That case needs to get
moving a little further before

Yeah.

Yeah.

Cover it. But, alright. Since this is an ever
evolving case, that's continuesto be on trial Yeah. It's a it's
a wild one.

That's I mean, it's fantastic case to to kind of
watch as an outside observer

Mhmm.

Setting aside, like, the merits of the
accusations and all that stuff.Good lawyering, interesting
stories. I mean, it's it's beeneverywhere, social media.

Yeah. Yep. So we'll keep you updated.

Alright. Our next story is a is a bit of a it is
it is a downer, I shouldn't say.It's a bit of a downer. It's it
is a depressing story, but it's,I I it's I think it's important
to cover. It it very much is inline with the story that was, we
covered on our last episode,relating to the TikTok lawsuits.
And on that episode and thelawsuits we talked about there,

(29:18):
basically boiled downallegations that, like, TikTok
and social media more broadly,it poses a mental health,
threat, to to young people. It'saddictive, and it can, you know,
exacerbate mental healthconditions, whatever. This is,
you know, an extreme version ofthat, and this is as it relates
to a number a a specific AIchatbot app by the name of

(29:41):
character dotai. So we'll startwith what what is the app.
Character dotai, and kind ofmore broadly, there's a lot of
AI companionship slash friendapps that are on the market.
Some of them are, like, justovertly pornographic, so you
can, like, have, like, you know,like, sexual exchanges with

(30:05):
these chatbots or or whatever.And other of them are just,
like, goofy, playful. Like, youyou could just chitchat like a
friend. I mean, I remember asfar back as yeah. My producer's
nodding along.
I remember as far back as, like,the early 2000s. Remember AIM?

Mhmm. Do you

remember Smarter Child?

Yes.

Yeah. Wow.

Blast from the past.

Yeah. And and so you could and it was like
something you did, like, withyour friends at a sleepover.

Mhmm. And

you would just be like, hey, sport or child. Like,
you know, why do you stink? Youknow?

Yeah. Yeah.

It's like stupid things. Like, it was, like,
funny to get a response backfrom a robot.

Right.

So some of them are like that, and then some of them
are, you know, adult, like,explicitly adult. Some of them,
I mean, a lot of them are, like,the ones that, you know, some of
the listeners are maybe using,like like, chat gpt where you
can, you know, use it for morepractical things.

So these are but some of them are
legitimately, like, you're justchatting. And then you know
you're chatting with AI.

Yeah. Yeah. They don't the the app does not try
overtly to deceive the user.Like, it there's they're not
saying, you know, you aren'ttalking to a real person. Like,
they're open about that.
And even in in the chats thatyou have on character dotai,
like, in the text box, it says,like, a as a reminder something
along the line of, like,reminder you were chatting with
an AI.

Got it.

Something like that. So the idea is, like, you
know, hopefully, you don'tforget that. Yeah. Character
dotai, their users get to kindof create their own custom
chatbot based on, like, whateverpreferences they want. You could
talk to, like, historicalfigures.
I'm gonna be relying today a loton the recent New York Times
article, which is from October23rd by Kevin Ruz. And in that

(31:49):
article, he describes characterdotai as follows, quote, users
can select from a vast array ofuser created chat box that mimic
celebrity celebrities like ElonMusk, historical figures like
William Shakespeare, orunlicensed versions of fictional
characters, unquote. In thiscase, it would be Daenerys
Targaryen, which is thecharacter from Game of Thrones.

Mhmm.

That is who the individual the the 14 year old
boy that we're gonna be talkingabout here in a moment, decided
to set up this, like, chattingrelationship with. As an aside,
yes. All of these anytimethey're using these, like,
fictional characters that are,like, licensed IP, like, they
are not paying licenses fees. Soso, like, there's, like that's a
whole another conversation, butthis, yeah, I think is also

(32:32):
doing blatant intellectualproperty infringement, but, you
know, separate discussion.Anyways Allegedly Oh,

Anyways Allegedly Allegedly as your

defamation attorney.

My opinion Okay. Okay. Yeah. That's not
gonna

save you,

but Yeah. Go ahead. My yeah. Anyways, some so
there's a lot of different waysyou can use them, and they're
marketed differently. They'remarketed towards all types of
things.
This app in particular, has someconcerning traits, I would say,
that that make it stick out atleast in light of what actually

(33:05):
happened here. Going back to theNew York Times piece, quote,
some of character dot ai's mostpopular chat box had

names like aggressive teacher and high
school simulator, and many seemto

be tailor made for aggressive teacher and high
school simulator, and many seemto be tailor made for teenage
wish fulfillment. Thedescription of 1 particular
character, which has received176,000,000 messages from users,
read, your best your boy bestfriend who has a secret crush on
you, unquote.

Oh, so these are, like, preloaded, you're not
making up these,

I'm not sure. I think

Or maybe it's a little bit of both. Yeah.

I think maybe you can make your own and then
others can use it.

Oh, okay.

I'm not exactly sure. But but some of the most
most popular ones on thisplatform are, like, clearly
targeted at people under the ageof 18. Yeah. Okay. A
spokesperson for the companysaid, quote, Gen z and younger
millennials make up asignificant portion of our
community and that younger usersenjoy the character experience
both for meaningful andeducational conversations as
well as for entertainment.
The average user spend more thanan hour a day on the platform,

(34:07):
unquote. So, theoretically, theyare at least, acknowledging that
a lot of their users are areyoung children, which, you know,
should imply a certain amountof, like, safety and and things
like that. Mhmm. So, theindividual that we're gonna be
talking about here, and and II'm gonna say this, and I'm

(34:28):
gonna try not to dwell on it.But for those of you that are
listening that are, sensitive tothis type of thing, this story
does involve, the death of a 14year old boy, and does involve,
you know, him taking his ownlife as a result.
So, there's really no way to saythat. That expresses enough,
enough, you know, sadness aboutthat fact, but that is what the

(34:49):
story is. So, skip to the end ifyou wanna get past the sad part.
So, the individual is a 14 yearold boy from Orlando, Florida,
whose name I'm not gonnamention. He apparently had spent
months talking to, chatbots oncharacter dotai.
He, specifically, as I mentionedbefore, was using one that was

(35:11):
created to mimic, the nanny'sDaenerys Targaryen from Game of
Thrones. And he knew or he wouldhave known that, you know, this
was an AI model. Like, there'sthere's a lawsuit that came out
of this. There's no allegationsthat, you know, he was confused,
that he was talking to a realperson. So, nonetheless, he

(35:33):
developed, frankly, accordingto, his mother who's in who's
interviewed for this piece andwho eventually filed a lawsuit,
which we'll talk about.
And, records that were reviewedby The New York Times clearly
developed an emotionalattachment. He texted the bot
constantly, talking to it, youknow, dozens of times a day,
engaging in long, like, roleplaying dialogues where he,

(35:55):
like, pretended to be a Game ofThrones character, which is I
don't know. That is not all thatweird for a a little boy, like,
to let No. That's playful. Yeah.
But some of their chats gotromantic, and some of them got
even sexual. But a lot of thetimes, at least according to the
the article here, the thechatbot acts like a friend,
quote, a judgment free soundingboard he could count on to

(36:18):
listen supportively and givegood advice, who who really
broke character and alwaystexted back, unquote.

Mhmm.

So, the kind of level of attachment here that,
the deceased, 14 year old, gotto is, I think, revealing about
how even though you're lookingat something in the face, which
says, you know, I am a chatbot.I am not real. Like, emotions

(36:45):
don't work that way.

Right.

So he kept the journal as well. The the boy
did, and he wrote in hisjournal, quote, I like staying
in my room so much because Istart to detach from this
reality. I also feel more atpeace, more connected with
Danny. Danny is the chatbot.Mhmm.
And much more in love with herand just happier, unquote. The
boy in this case did have, mildAsperger's syndrome, which I do
think is relevant, but he neverhad behavioral mental health

(37:10):
problems before according to hismother. And he quoting from the
piece earlier this year, hestarted getting in trouble at
school. His parents arranged forhim to see a therapist. He went
to 5 sessions.
He was giving a new diagnosis ofanxiety and disruptive mood
dysregulation disorder, unquote.The the kid here, apparently

(37:35):
really used the chatbot liketherapist at times and
discussed, you know, hispersonal problems and things you
know, issues at school,etcetera.

Or you could even say, like, a friend.

Yeah.

Which, I mean, I could see the good side of
that if there are kids that arelonely, but I can also see,
like, that sad, you know, at thesame time.

Oh, man. I mean so that's what's interesting. The
whole, like, loneliness anglebecause that is actually what a
lot of these tech founders ofthese different, like, chatbots
are expressly saying, hey. We'readdressing, loneliness. We are
selling a product that we canhelp people be less lonely.

Yes.

And and it is like an optimistic thing. So, like,

But also, like, then at the same time, targets
potentially a more vulnerable,you know, group of people.

Well yeah. I mean, there's a lot going on here, and
I didn't get too far into theactual lawsuit. I was more
caught up with the details ofthe background of of what this,
chatbot does and and what, youknow, the relationship that it
formed with this child. Butthere's nothing stopping these
chatbots from, like, engagingin, like, sexual conversations

(38:46):
with a minor, which I think is

So, yeah, there's no, like, restrictions
on

Yeah.

The the

content. That's gotta be

That's an issue.

Yeah.

Big time.

I

mean, that's gotta be something that is addressed,
like, bare minimum. Right? Thatthat's gotta be the same, but
then you get into, like, these,like, gray areas of, like,
emotional attraction and, youknow, manipulation. I don't
wanna say I mean, there's not,as far as I know, allegations
that the chatbot wasmanipulating this kid towards
taking his own life. And fromthe the logs that I saw, it

(39:17):
didn't seem like there was like,no one was encouraging but I
think that a neutral observerwould view these chat logs as,
like, an unhealthy relationshipgiven that this is not a real
person.

Right. And I'm just I mean, you know, we've
talked about this before where,like, AI is only as good as, you
know, the the data you put intoit. And it would just seem like
you could quickly lose control

Yeah.

As a company of, you know, what AI is is
saying because it's gonna it'sgonna keep evolving, you know,
based on the inputs it gets fromall these users.

Yeah. So here's, going back to The New York Times
piece kind of on this quote.There's now a booming largely
unregulated industry of AIcompanion apps for monthly
subscription free usually around$10. Users, of these apps can
create their own AI companionsor pick from a menu of prebuilt
personas, chat with them in avariety of ways, including text
messages and voice chats. Manyof the apps are designed to

(40:13):
simulate girlfriends,boyfriends, or other intimate
relationships, and some marketthemselves as a way of combating
the so called, lonelinessepidemic.
And later in the piece, there'sa quote from, Noam Shazir, who's
one of the founders of ofCharacter dotai, and he says,
quote, it's gonna be super,super helpful to a lot of people
who are lonely or depressed,unquote. The piece goes on to

(40:38):
discuss, the reports of of otherusers. For some users, AI
companions, AI friends, tend toworsen social isolation? I

was just thinking that, and I didn't
wanna, like, cut you off. No.Yeah. I I it's like we're
addressing this issue in our dayand age where everybody is, you
know, looking at their phonesand obsessed with social media,
and we interact in, you know, aa digital world as opposed to
face to face. But then if you'recreating this product that's
supposed to, like, help that,except it's only making them

(41:08):
turn inward more.

Yeah. And and and, you know, you only have so much,
like, emotional availability inthe day. And these AI chatbots
are, like, are, like, anemotional availability sync. You
know? If you like, if I have,you know, 5 hours of energy to,
like, be empathetic towards myfellow human beings, you know,
like, if that's how much timeand energy I have in a given

(41:30):
day, you know, I'm now wastingit, literally wasting it on this
chatbot.

Right. Because he said he he liked to keep
himself locked in his room.

He preferred it over anything else. And that's,
yeah. I mean, that's I don'tknow. There's no other way to
say it, I think, than that seemsreally sad. So, I don't wanna
get into details of the actual,you know, event of of him,
taking his own life.
You can look that up if you wantto. But it's really sad. And

(41:58):
there's there doesn't seem to beyou know, there's never a moment
where the chatbot is saying,like, I want you to do this.
Right? But there's it's kindaplaying along, frankly.
It's staying in character and,like, you know, it just it just
is a weird conversation that ithas basically, the moment up
till, he does it. He's the lastperson, you know, person he

(42:22):
talks to is this chatbot. Mhmm.So, yeah, it's it's a really sad
story. There's and it it kind ofillustrates in a really painful
way some of the pitfalls ofapplying AI to, you know, every
problem under the sun, which iswhat, you know, tech founders
TikTok lawsuits.
You know, it it's, I mean, it's,it's, the TikTok lawsuits, you

(42:50):
know, it it's, I mean, it's achatbot. It the most charitable
way you could describe it is isits attention harvesting. You
know, it's trying to just getthe attention of its users for
whatever reasons. I don't know.Maybe it just displays ads on
the bottom or something stupidlike that.
Probably does. Mhmm. But thebyproduct of that is, like,
whatever you wanna call thisweird relationship that this

(43:11):
this poor kid had with it. And,and maybe, you know, 1,000 or
millions of other people are aredeveloping in lieu of, like,
real personal relationships withpeople. I I think it's a bizarre
claim from this from the founderof the company that, like, oh,
this can help with loneliness

Mhmm.

Because that assumes that, like, having a
relationship with the chatbot isidentical to having a
relationship with a person. Iwould say it's not. You know?
And it therefore, it'sexacerbating loneliness. You
know?
Yeah. You can't be unlonely bytalking to a chatbot, I think.
Or maybe I'm wrong. Who knows?In any event, the, this you

(43:47):
know, the reason we're talkingabout it is because it did it
did draw a lawsuit from the,from the child's mother, whose
name is Megan Garcia.
She's an attorney. She is we arerecording today. It is
Wednesday, October 23rd. She hasdone some, like, online media

(44:08):
appearances for, like, YouTubechannels that that talk about
these things, and she's beenaround kind of pitching her
lawsuit to different,publications and and is is told
folks that she intends to fileher lawsuit today, so October
23rd.

Okay.

So I haven't seen the lawsuit.

Actually, yeah, it looks like I'm reading an
article on Reuters. It lookslike she did file it yesterday

Okay. Maybe late,

and said this is just what she quoted. I don't
know if this is in the lawsuitor what she said to the this
article, but she said thecompany programmed its chatbot
to misrepresent itself as a realperson, a licensed
psychotherapist, and an adultlover, ultimately resulting in
her son's desire to no longerlive outside of the world

(44:56):
created by the service.

Yeah. I mean, without looking looking at it, I
have no idea the merits of thelawsuit and everything else. You
know, unlicensed practice inmedicine seems like an
interesting claim there.

Yeah. Really. Well, yeah. It says

In some comments that during some interviews that
she did in the lead up to this,she she said, she accused
character dotai of harvestingteenage, data to train its
models, using indicative designfeatures to increase engagement,
steering users towards intimateand sexual conversations in the
hopes of luring them in. Shesaid, quote, I feel like it's a
big experiment. My kid was justcollateral damage, unquote.

(45:34):
Allegations which are prettysimilar, at least

overall, to what

the attorneys general of general of state of
Illinois Mhmm. And 13 otherstates have alleged against
TikTok.

Right.

So

Well, actually, yeah, almost identical because
The Guardian, reported on thisand said her claims are
negligence, wrongful death, butalso deceptive trade practices.

So that's very interesting.

That's exactly what was brought

against that talk. You you do have a private cause
of action under most of thosestatutes. So that's actually
quite interesting because and Ibet that she is actually, I
don't have to guess because, theNew York Times piece talks about
it. Miss Garcia, the the mother,found a couple of different law

(46:20):
firms who are starting to createniche practices in this area.
Mhmm.
The, Social Media Victims LawCenter, which is a a plaintiff's
firm, based in Seattle that thathas brought lawsuits against
Meta, TikTok, Snap, Discord, andRoblox. Seemingly, they're
building up a practice thatspecializes in kind of this type
of thing, which is veryinteresting.

Mhmm.

The firm, the Social Media the social media
victims law center started by anattorney named Matthew Bergman,
and he said in an interview,quote, the theme of our work is
that social media and nowcharacter dotai poses a clear
and present danger to youngpeople because they are
vulnerable to persuasivealgorithms that capitalize on
their immaturity, unquote. Thereis also another law group that's

(47:08):
involved, the Tech Justice LawProject, which I believe I
actually filed the lawsuit on onthe mother's behalf. And there's
another group, like a nonprofitthat has gotten involved as a
technical adviser, Center ForHumane Technology. So there it's
interesting that there are now,like, places to go,

(47:31):
professionals, experts, peoplewith experience that are
offering these services to, youknow, potentially aggrieved
victims like the mother in thiscase. Mhmm.
It seems like an area of lawthat will, I mean, it has to
evolve. Right? And

Right.

And this is, by the way, like say what you want
about I mean, I I'm a defenseattorney. I I but I I started my
career on the plaintiff side.People have strong opinions
about plaintiff's attorneys. Iwill say this. They move
typically a lot faster thanregulators do, to when it comes
to, like, consumer actions,things like this.
So if, like, there's a companythat's doing something bad and

(48:08):
harmful, like, plaintiff'slawyers will be on it. Right.
And that's what's happening herebecause they're way ahead of
whatever congress thinks they'regonna do. You know? And, by the
way, the attorneys generals ofthe states have filed these
lawsuits because TikTok as well.
But, like, congress doesn't havea clue.

Well, yeah, I just our legislature doesn't
move that fast

Right.

To keep up with the technology. That's always
been the case, but it you know,it's only getting faster. So But

if these I mean, if these companies get, you know,
crushed with, like, hugeverdicts for, under the relevant
consumer fraud statutes, like,that will regulate their
activity.

Oh, for sure.

Yeah. That will regulate their
activity faster than a law wouldRight. Like, than a than

a statute would. Regulate their activity faster
than a law would Right.

Like, than a than a statute would. So
Right.

So, yeah, I mean, again, really sad story, but,
like,

this type

of I I

feel like we're moving a 1000000 miles an hour
with Mhmm. AI and it it justapplying it to everything.

Well and I think that there's just not it's
it's still the wild west, youknow, and we and it's the
unpredictability of it, I think,requires companies to, you know,
have some forethought and putsome real responsibilities on
them to think ahead of, youknow, what are the potential

(49:18):
outcomes and how do we put inplace protections in advance.
Like, I just found this Forbesart I mean, these articles are
coming out like this came out aminute ago. You know, like, this
is a hot issue right now. The

lawsuit hit last night.

Yeah. So it's yeah. But, Should

we get there

first? Right. Yeah. Move over New York Times.
But it does note that, the theboy confided in the bot about
feelings of depression andsuicide, and there was no
intervention from the platform.
So that's a perfect example ofthere has to be, and I don't do
anything in techno you know, asfar as, like, writing programs,

(49:53):
but I would imagine there's someway where, you know, if a
conversation starts to steer acertain way, there should be,
you know, there should be somereporting mechanism or some red
flags. I mean, even, like,thinking about, patient and and
their psychiatrist, there is abasis for a psychiatrist to
break the confidentiality whenthey think that their client is

(50:15):
gonna harm themselves.

And and

So why shouldn't there be that, you

know, the same thing here.

It's a bit rich, you know, that this I mean,
these AIs are they're largelanguage models. Their whole
thing is being able to interprethuman speech and, in a way that,
you know, is relatable and,mimics, you know, having
conversation with a real person.So, like, this AI, right, is is
listening to this boy say thesethings. This company advertises

(50:42):
they have, you know, an AI thatcan mimic human interactions. It
actually would be cheaper, youwould think, for them to have
some type of, I don't know,another AI that monitors the
activity of its AIs.
Right? So if

if

if, like, one of these chatbots is talking to a
kid who's talking about, like,I'm depressed, like, that ought
to be flagged.

Yep. And that

doesn't have to be

that doesn't have to involve paying a 1000000
people to read these things.Right. That should be automated.

Like, let's start monitoring this and then,
you know, how often are theytalking about these feelings

and pull up? Company is, like, uniquely built
to do that probably prettyeasily.

Yeah. You're right.

That's the the weird part to me is, like,
you're already you already havea product that reviews text
conversations.

Right.

Like, just make it review the ones that you create
with your other product.

Right.

And flag certain things, you know. And and if
those things happen, like, youknow, whatever needs to happen
after that, I don't know. Imean, maybe there's state
regulations about mandatoryreporting, you know, maybe, you
know, it would be great if theparents got some type of
notification or, like, that'sprobably never gonna happen.
Right.

Or it

just turns it off. You know?

Right.

Yeah. Or it just says, you know what? You're
banned.

Well and then I I could see that turning to
deeper depression for the userRight. For 2, you know, then
feeling ultimately rejected.

Yes.

But yeah. No. There has to be some way to,
you're right. Of course, theythey know how to create these.
You know?
But, I

mean, it's that's

what's it's bizarre to me because,
like,

they have the the technology already. Because
everyone else that was, like,doing like, so, like, 10 years
ago or 20 years ago, like,

it was always a

thing on, like, Internet forums. Like, if there
was, like, content that was,like, you know, awful or or
depressing or people talkingabout, like, do you know,
harming themselves or whateveron, like, Internet forums. Like,
that was a topic of, like, whatdo you what is the forum
supposed to do? So what is,like, Facebook supposed to do?
Yeah.
What is Reddit supposed to do?Like and and the the thing was,
like, well, listen. We can'tmonitor all that. Right. There's

(52:27):
billions of posts every second.
We can't possibly do that. Well,now you actually can. Like, it's
and in fact, you build a productthat can do it. So, yeah, it
does seem like yeah. You don'tthink this would happen?
Mhmm. Especially when the wholething is, like, cartoon
characters and fantasycharacters and, you know,
boyfriend simulators and stuffthat, like, teenagers are gonna
be interested in.

Yep.

So I don't know.

Yeah. It's and it's just unfortunate that it,
you know, takes something likethis for it to, you know, be
addressed. Like, these companiesshould be taking that, you know,
that responsibility in theforefront, especially when you
know, like you said, you'retargeting a group of,
adolescents who have issuesregulating their emotions
without this.

Yeah.

I mean,

I mean, adults are adults, and, you know, the
standard needs to be differentthere. But when and it's also
different if a kid, you know,gains access to something that's
meant for adults, like, by lyingabout their age or something
like that. That that to me isdifferent. But not here where
they're seemingly targeting, youknow, children

Mhmm.

And adolescents. So, anyways, I'll be interested
to see, what motion to dismissthey file. Yeah. Yeah. And, and
just the litigation around thisissue.
To me, this goes in the samebucket as the TikTok lawsuits
as, like, you know, privateactors trying to push back
against, social media,algorithmic, like, social

(53:52):
coercion,

you know,

things like that. So we'll see. It's it's a it's
an it's an interesting thingthat, you know, I personally
wanna keep my eye on justbecause it's fascinating. But,
yeah. Sad story but an importantone, I think.

Absolutely.

Folks, if you or someone you know is having
trouble or having thoughts ofself harm or anything like that,
there are resources. You cancall or text 988 to reach the
988, suicide and crisis lifelineor go on to speaking of
suicide.com/resources for a listof additional resources.
Alright, everyone. That's theshow. Thanks for listening.

(54:30):
Reminder, you could find usanywhere you get your podcast,
YouTube, Spotify, ApplePodcasts, etcetera. We publish
every 2 weeks, and we'll talk toyou then.

All Episodes

An AI chatbot pushed a teen to kill himself, a lawsuit against its creator alleges - Ep. 60

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}An AI chatbot pushed a teen to kill himself, a lawsuit against its creator alleges - Ep. 60