Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases

news.sky.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 210 posts

Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases

#101

Post by moonu »

Jensson wrote: post #97
jshier wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iPhones, no, there's no AI replacement or synthesis of objects from the camera. There were Android phones doing this (famously I think it was Samsung where it would replace images of the moon with a different image of the moon), and the Photos app has AI manipulation features. And most of the time, Apple's noise removal algorithm actually removes detail from images, most notably making text and straight lines wobbly.

> iPhones, no, there's no AI replacement or synthesis of objects from the camera This is AI. Its not generative AI if that is what you mean, but it is AI altering the image and adding things that wasn't there, usually its fine sometimes it fails horribly and make the picture totally different. https://x.com/mitchcohen/status/1476351601862483968

https://x.com/mitchcohen/status/1476951534160257026?s=20 The replies explain that it was a leaf obscuring the face

Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases

#102

Post by teravor »

dindunuf wrote: post #28
deepserket wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about a system that saves in some way the hash in a Blockchain, and if you, eg, XOR the hash of the video with the hash of the previous block you will "certainly" know that the video was created between the previous block and the block where the hash is saved in. That's a starting point.

that does nothing to verify authenticity

it does something, sometimes. it pushes the required fabrication timeline back.

if it is mandated that every photo or video taken for the possible use in evidence is notarized at the time of acquisition, any fabrication would necessitate total premeditation. that is, the fabricators would need to know ahead of time what they were pursuing and what evidence they would need. this seems like a very costly barrier.

for example, altering security footage would require some fantastical elements: a real-time system of ingesting real footage and altering it in real-time to slip it into the notarization pipeline within the error margins.

requiring that any equipment that produces acceptable evidence stream commitment hashes in real-time to public append-only repositories would be an enormous step forward.

Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases

#103

Post by nullc »

constableclaude wrote: post #76

The headline evokes ideas of creating a video of a suspect perpetrating the crime but what I think is much more likely is the police officer used AI to enhance an image in a way that they considered innocuous, e.g: a photo was blurry so they “enhanced” it. Since “enhancing” is letting AI fill in the gaps it would be using AI to “create evidence”. Regardless of what they did, tampering with evidence is completely unac…

> but what I think is much more likely

My mind went straight to using the AI to write a statement and the AI made stuff up, which would be a nearly guaranteed outcome from using existing LLMs for that task, and it's exactly the sort of thing that I'm sure many officers are doing ... and it could go a fair time before it was discovered.

Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases

#104

Post by tsss »

constableclaude wrote: post #76

The headline evokes ideas of creating a video of a suspect perpetrating the crime but what I think is much more likely is the police officer used AI to enhance an image in a way that they considered innocuous, e.g: a photo was blurry so they “enhanced” it. Since “enhancing” is letting AI fill in the gaps it would be using AI to “create evidence”. Regardless of what they did, tampering with evidence is completely unac…

If you think the police don't fabricate evidence on the regular, simply because their hunch doesn't match the fact or because they don't like the suspect, then you are way too gullible. Back in the day they just planted a baggie of drugs on you.

Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases

#105

Post by cadamsdotcom »

godwinson__4-8 wrote: post #82
cadamsdotcom wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A burden of proof is associated with an individual claim. There’s no “burden of proof in the other direction” - what you’ve actually done is created a second burden of proof and also - worse - attempted to distract from the original point. It is disingenuous to weasel out of proving one claim by making another, or saying “look over here” Also, outrageous claims in opposite directions can both be bullshit.

On what basis is it an outrageous claim? You think the number is closer to 0? That sounds like a more outrageous claim to me.

~~Please point to the place where I said your claim was outrageous.~~

Edit; upon closer examination. I did imply in my last paragraph that your claim was outrageous. Bit of a gaffe considering I’m the agitator here. My apologies.

Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases

#106

Post by golem14 »

pseudo0 wrote: post #72
jyounker wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When DNA matching was introduced, we discovered that at minimum 10% of people on death row were innocent. Death row cases are among the most litigated and examined cases. So, 10% is a reasonable floor, and we're already in double digits.

That stat is off by a couple orders of magnitude. The total number of death penalty convictions overturned by DNA evidence is 29 (as of 2025). There are a couple thousand death row inmates right now, and the denominator here is all the people who were on death row in the last 20+ years. That's a rate of significantly https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/first-death-row-exoneration-inv...

Shouldn't the denominator be the number of people actually executed ? 691 in the last 20 years, for instance ?

Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases

#107

Post by wyldberry »

bouncycastle wrote: post #91
pseudo0 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That stat is off by a couple orders of magnitude. The total number of death penalty convictions overturned by DNA evidence is 29 (as of 2025). There are a couple thousand death row inmates right now, and the denominator here is all the people who were on death row in the last 20+ years. That's a rate of significantly https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/first-death-row-exoneration-inv...

it doesn't matter if it's 29 or 2900. Even 1 is wrong.

The commenter isn't litigating that claim, they are litigating the claim that at least 1 out of 10 of those on death row were false.

Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases

#108

Post by sudonem »

I would be interested in knowing both what kind of fabrication occurred, but perhaps I’m not curious about how it was discovered?

Did the defense use some sort of tool to debunk? Was it just an obvious deepfake etc? Or was it the officer’s ineptitude that got him caught?

Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases

#110

Post by xstas1 »

smallmancontrov wrote: post #59
cadamsdotcom wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> large double-digit percentage This is a very very intense claim, and if true, would represent a monumental institutional failure across hundreds or even thousands of disparate organizations. Do you have any data to support your hunch? Strong claims require strong evidence.

A few years ago, one of my coworkers was arrested for a domestic violence complaint. Looking into his case, I found an extremely specific lurid description of the allegations -- and then I found the same lurid description copy/pasted to every other person recently arrested for the same crime. I'm probably getting the specific terms wrong, but I did click through to see it on a government website, because my first sus…

Can you put some of the text in a comment here?
Post reply on HN