conv.

All stories
SecurityQuiet 5d · day 5

CPS prosecutor cited a fake AI-generated case in child rape prosecution dispute

A senior Crown Prosecution Service lawyer referenced a nonexistent legal precedent, apparently from an AI search, in a high court challenge over prosecuting an 11-year-old boy.

newest coverage 5d agosummary written 5d ago10 pieces34 likes & upvotes NewswiresMastodonRedditHacker News

What to know

  • A senior CPS prosecutor cited a nonexistent legal precedent, apparently generated by AI search, while arguing to prosecute a child.
  • It is only the second known AI-hallucination incident involving the CPS this year, following a February extradition case error.
  • The high court said the fabricated citation did not affect the outcome of the boy's case, which proceeds to trial in youth courts.
  • An AI-and-law expert calls the error a "serious failure" given the state's prosecutorial power and the precedent-based nature of legal authority.

“It calls into question norms of trust in the law where we treat authorities as precious things. You can’t make them up; it’s out of bounds.”

Brian Flanagan, Associate professor of law, Maynooth University · The Guardian ↗ · Nov 2

Ravinder Dhillon Senior crown prosecutor, CPS rape and serious sexual offences unitBrian Flanagan Associate professor of law, Maynooth UniversityCrown Prosecution Service (CPS) UK public prosecution agency

CPS prosecutor cited a fake AI-generated case in child rape prosecution dispute
theguardian.com

How it unfolded 1 development · click the chart to see its coverage articlesposts

Peak 4 pieces in two hours at Nov 3, 6 AM; 10 pieces over 6 days (3 articles · 6 posts · 1 comment) Nov 3, 12 AM — 3 pieces · 3 articles — Newswires 2, Mastodon 1Nov 3, 2 AM — quietNov 3, 4 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Reddit 1Nov 3, 6 AM — 4 pieces · 4 posts — Mastodon 3, Hacker News 1Nov 3, 8 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Mastodon 1Nov 3, 10 AM — quietNov 3, 12 PM — quietNov 3, 2 PM — quietNov 3, 4 PM — quietNov 3, 6 PM — quietNov 3, 8 PM — quietNov 3, 10 PM — quietNov 4, 12 AM — quietNov 4, 2 AM — 1 piece · 1 comment — Reddit 1Nov 4, 4 AM — quietNov 4, 6 AM — quietNov 4, 8 AM — quietNov 4, 10 AM — quietNov 4, 12 PM — quietNov 4, 2 PM — quietNov 4, 4 PM — quietNov 4, 6 PM — quietNov 4, 8 PM — quietNov 4, 10 PM — quietNov 5, 12 AM — quietNov 5, 2 AM — quietNov 5, 4 AM — quietNov 5, 6 AM — quietNov 5, 8 AM — quietNov 5, 10 AM — quietNov 5, 12 PM — quietNov 5, 2 PM — quietNov 5, 4 PM — quietNov 5, 6 PM — quietNov 5, 8 PM — quietNov 5, 10 PM — quietNov 6, 12 AM — quietNov 6, 2 AM — quietNov 6, 4 AM — quietNov 6, 6 AM — quietNov 6, 8 AM — quietNov 6, 10 AM — quietNov 6, 12 PM — quietNov 6, 2 PM — quietNov 6, 4 PM — quietNov 6, 6 PM — quietNov 6, 8 PM — quietNov 6, 10 PM — quietYesterday, 12 AM — quietYesterday, 2 AM — quietYesterday, 4 AM — quietYesterday, 6 AM — quietYesterday, 8 AM — quietYesterday, 10 AM — quietYesterday, 12 PM — quietYesterday, 2 PM — quietYesterday, 4 PM — quietYesterday, 6 PM — quietYesterday, 8 PM — quietYesterday, 10 PM — quietToday, 12 AM — quietToday, 2 AM — quietToday, 4 AM — quietToday, 6 AM — quietToday, 8 AM — quietToday, 10 AM — quiet 1
Nov 4Nov 5Nov 6yesterdaynow · 12:41 PM ET
  1. 1

    Guardian reveals the fabricated-case incident and expert reaction

    The Guardian published an exclusive report on the fabricated citation, quoting an AI-and-law expert calling it a "serious failure" and noting the high court said the error did not affect the outcome of the boy's case, which is set for trial in youth courts.

    “This was used as a legal source to argue for the prosecution of a child and that legal source doesn’t exist: that’s a serious failure…”
    — Brian Flanagan
    1. 2 outlets ‘A serious failure’: CPS prosecutor cites imaginary case to high court after AI search

      first by Mastodon, 5d ago · also Guardian

    • The simple search can find much of content humans need to dig through, while AI can provide more relevant data, combined properly. The downside is that it often produces slop (especially when there's no relevant data), but that's what verifying is for. The human part should make sure those data are correct and not slop, and this way the final…

      fantomas_666r/technology4d agoview on r/technology ↗
    2 more of the top 3 · 4 posts in this stretch
    • SuffolkLITLab@esq.social

      TL;DR: A CPS prosecutor cited a nonexistent legal case in a high court trial concerning an alleged child rape, raising alarms about AI hallucinations influencing the justice system. This incident adds to numerous AI-related errors impacting court proceedings. https://www. theguardian.com/technology/202…

      SuffolkLITLab@esq.socialMastodon5d agoview on Mastodon ↗

    • "Ravinder Dhillon, representing the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), referenced an entirely made-up case during a dispute over whether a child should be prosecuted for the rape of his younger sister, court documents have revealed." # law # AI # justice https://www. theguardian.com/technology/202…

      postfilm@ieji.deMastodon5d agoview on Mastodon ↗
    all of them →
  2. background

    Dhillon admits the citation was fabricated — Dhillon acknowledged the nonexistent case citation was made in error, saying she had actually meant to refer to a different, real decision made 15 years earlier; two senior high court judges called her explanation "unsatisfactory".

  3. background

    Dhillon cites fabricated case while arguing to prosecute 11-year-old — Senior crown prosecutor Ravinder Dhillon submitted a detailed reference to a case she called "CPS – R v J [2024] EWCA Crim 3529" to argue for prosecuting an 11-year-old boy accused of raping his seven-year-old sister; the case does not exist. The decision to proceed was confirmed by the chief crown prosecutor.

  4. background

    CPS admits first AI-related citation error in extradition case — The CPS acknowledged that a lawyer handling an extradition case involving two Romanians convicted of minor offences had cited nonexistent legal authorities, likely generated by AI; the agency said the error was only caught when opposing lawyers could not find the cases and concluded recurrence risk was low.

  5. background

    High court responds to wave of AI hallucination cases — The high court addressed a string of cases, including housing disputes, where AI-generated errors had surfaced in legal submissions, setting the backdrop for later CPS incident.

What people are saying 1 voices from 1 site · best of 4 · verbatim