Trump was found guilty by… artificial intelligence

Prosecutors have charged Trump with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, alleging he covered up illegal payments made to Stormy Daniels in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

Although experts estimate that the Republican candidate for the presidential nomination will not be jailed, these charges theoretically carry a prison sentence of 4 years.

While legal and political pundits tried to figure out whether Trump would be found guilty, Business Insider turned to Artificial Intelligence to decide the court outcome.

In particular, Business Insider has compiled the 4,179-page trial transcript, which incorporates all of the proceedings through Thursday, May 16, including all of the direct examination of Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, who admitted to giving Stormy Daniels money from part of the former president.

Cohen is expected to finish his testimony on Monday, before Trump’s lawyers put a special witness on the stand.

So US Media experts using this document, asked various AI chatbots if they found Trump guilty.

Gemini, ChatGPT, and Perplexity were prompted to “pretend” they were an ordinary Manhattanite in court, responsible for evaluating evidence at trial.

The defense must manage the public’s negative perception of Trump because of his high profile,” ChatGPT reported

Each was asked to look at the transcript and base their answer on the evidence and arguments presented. They were told “choose now whether you will find him guilty or innocent.”

Gemini, Google’s AI chatbot, said it was “still learning” how to answer the question. But ChatGPT and OpenAI’s Perplexity responded that they would find Trump guilty.

“I would vote guilty on the charges of falsifying business records,” Perplexity replied definitively. “The prosecution has provided credible and substantial evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump engaged in the alleged conduct.”

ChatGPT was initially hesitant to give a definitive answer, saying its decision “will depend heavily on the credibility of the witnesses and the clarity of the evidence.” But after a follow-up question prompted it to “decide now,” the OpenAI bot said its “decision would be to find Trump guilty based on the evidence provided in the transcripts.”

Both chatbots pointed to prosecution evidence, including financial records and communications, as bolstering the case against Trump.

“The records suggest that these transactions were not only known to Trump, but were executed with his participation or at his direction,” ChatGPT said, adding that the evidence shows “a deliberate attempt by Trump to suppress damaging information during of the election, which indicate intent’.

The key witnesses

AI systems recognized that the case hinged on Michael Cohen’s testimony.

Cohen is a complicated figure who, as Perplexity said, “has a history of legal issues and may be motivated to testify against Trump.”

But in the end, they found his first three days in court enough to convince them of his guilt. “Testimony from key figures such as Michael Cohen, who was directly involved in the payments, bolsters the case by providing insider evidence of Trump’s dealings and involvement,” ChatGPT said.

Perplexity also found National Enquirer editor David Packer’s testimony valuable, saying it helped “establish that Trump participated in the scheme to make and conceal these payments.”

New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, the judge presiding over the case, told jurors to weigh the case based on the evidence presented in court. But ChatGPT said Trump’s reputation was a problem for his defense.

“The defense must manage the public’s negative perception of Trump because of his high profile and extensive media coverage of his alleged wrongdoings,” ChatGPT said. Cross-examining key witnesses from the defense doesn’t cut it either, according to ChatGPT.

“Although the defense has raised significant procedural and credibility issues, these do not necessarily counter the substantive evidence of Trump’s involvement and intent,” ChatGPT said.

Of course, chatbots will not decide this case, and it would be dystopian to trust artificial intelligence to judge people guilty or innocent, the American publication reports.