A defense attorney in Florida is believed to be the first to use artificial intelligence-based facial recognition software to exonerate a client.

The New York Times is reporting that Patrick Bailey of Ft. Meyers, FL succesfully requested access to Clearview AI's facial recognition software in order to identify a witness who could testify whether Bailey's client caused a traffic accident that resulted in the death of the client's friend.

Clearview AI is a privately-owned, U.S. based company, that has "developed a revolutionary, web-based intelligence platform for law enforcement to use as a tool to help generate high-quality investigative leads. [Their] platform, powered by facial recognition technology, includes the largest known database of 30+ billion facial images sourced from public-only web sources, including news media, mugshot websites, public social media, and other open sources." 

Jerome Greco, who oversees a forensics technology lab at the Legal Aid Society, in New York City told the New York Times, “this is mostly being done as a P.R. stunt to try to push back against the negative publicity that Clearview has about its tool and how it’s being used by law enforcement.”

While this case may be a one-off for now...is the genie now out of the bottle setting a precedent for defense attorneys to have access to these powerful tools?

Read the full story at the New York Times.

_{Last Updated: 3 October 2022}

The post Florida Attorney Uses AI Facial Recognition Software to Exonerate Client appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

The Florida Supreme Court has updated its Standard Jury Instructions to specifically admonish jurors from discussing the cases they are hearing, "in person or through the telephone, writing, or electronic communication, such as a blog, twitter, e-mail, text message, or any other means." Interestingly, the Court has singled out "twitter" by name, but not other popular social media outlets like "Facebook" (although it seems pretty clear that court means to include all such activity.)

Additionally, the court updated the Instructions to specifically admonish jurors from conducting "any investigation of their own. This includes reading newspapers, watching television or using a computer, cell phone, the Internet, any electronic device, or any other means at all, to get information related to this case or the people and places involved in this case. This applies whether you are in the courthouse, at home, or anywhere else. You must not visit places mentioned in the trial or use the Internet to look at maps or pictures to see any place discussed during the trial." (Read the entire decision below.)

IN RE: STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES—REPORT NO. 2010-01 AND STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CI...

As with previous Jury Instructions, this admonition applies only to discussing the facts of the case. It does not explicitly instruct jurors to curtail any other of their (non-case-related) online activities. The information jurors post in their public social media profiles (e.g., Twitter, Facebook) can be excellent indicators of their personal interest, views, likes and dislikes. Many attorneys have found the information in these profiles useful as part of juror research during the selection process.

In our book Find Info Like a Pro, we discuss numerous instances where information lawyers have found in social networking profiles has proven crucial to a case. We also walk you through the process of searching the major social media networks like Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, Classmates, and others for information about specific individuals.

The post Florida Supreme Court Updates Jury Instructions to Keep Jurors From Tweeting appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.