Jeremy Barnett has contributed to this published paper on The Future of Cybercrime. The paper shows how AI and emerging technologies are closely tied to digital, physical and political security. It is a review from the perspective of cybercrime and law enforcement.
The paper can be downloaded from the link below. Jeremy proposes that a new category of JudicialTech is required to promote a debate around the need to set different rules for the use of AI by the Judiciary as opposed to the parties to a dispute.
The extract below provides an example of its content.
Courts and Tribunals (JudicialTech) Regarding law enforcement, the rapid adoption of emerging technology in courts has transformed criminal and civil trials. For example, prosecutions in the UK now rely increasingly on digital evidence, such as Body Worn footage, CCTV, Cell Site and mobile data, and messaging (EncroChat). In a broader context, the use of judicial algorithms raises existential issues around the future of the legal system. Susskind distinguishes between the use of predictive systems such as LexMachina (LexMachina, 2023) which predict the outcome of legal cases and generative systems such as LegalFly (LegalFly, 2023) for contract review (Susskind, 2023). D’Amato asked the question, ‘Can/Should Computers replace Judges? His conclusion was that there are aspects of human judgment that should not be reduced to algorithms. (D’Amato 1977).
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.