While the thought of lawyers lawyering with AI gives me the icks, I also understand that at a certain point it may play out like the self-driving car argument: once the AI is good enough, it will be better than the average human – since I think it’s obvious to everyone that human lawyers make plenty of mistakes. So if you knew the average lawyer made 3.6 mistakes per case and the AI only made 1.2, it’s still a net gain. On the other hand tho, this could lead to complacency that drives even more injustice.
They will ignore your errors and respond with errors of their own. AI will decide you’re guilty and deny your appeal.
A later case exactly like yours will result in an innocent verdict because the case used one different word and the butterfly effect will cause the AI to add the word “not” to the verdict.
AI will conclude that your case was ruled in error, but there’s nothing it can do because the appeal was already denied