The courts in DC use AI-driven software with predictive analytic algorithms to help prosecutors select a jury pool that is most likely to provide the verdict they seek. This software was not only used in DC to select Roger Stone’s jury but a NY State version of that software was also used in the selection of the Grand Jury in the case of Alvin Bragg’s attempts to seek an indictment against President Trump.

With the use of such AI-driven software, the odds are already in favor of the prosecutor from the beginning, as AI and quasi quantum algorithms crunch immense amounts of data to ensure that the state or federal agency is most likely to win. In fact, with the help of AI, Bragg got a document together that was not entirely legally sound or coherent but had a Grand Jury pool that AI selected that was most favorable to indict anything that involved President Donald J Trump. This means that AI is essentially ‘practicing law without a license’…

In summary, in this case, the prosecutor was essentially an AI, as Bragg’s team fed millions of documents that President Donald J. Trump furnished over years of harassment and the AI selected the general pool of jurors that would most likely return an indictment. The ODDS are ever in the prosecutor’s favor.

The question is whether the judge reviewed the document and executed their duty under NY State law to review the evidence, as he is required to do so. There is no regulation in the use of such technology and has not been challenged or addressed in the courts. Is this legal?…

This is the REAL story and should concern everyone. […] Unfortunately, from the moment you step into the courtroom, you’re already at a disadvantage with a jury and prosecutor who are already ‘programmed’ to ensure that you’re found guilty, regardless of whether you’re innocent or not.