Dear Nkoro Ebuka Chinaechetam , I moved your question to ChatGPT as an experiment. As a result, I received the following response from ChatGPT:

"The potential benefits of using AI-powered attorneys for accused defendants include the ability to quickly and efficiently analyze vast amounts of data, such as case law and statutes, and identify relevant legal arguments and precedents that may be used to defend the accused. Additionally, AI-powered attorneys may be able to provide defendants with access to legal representation who may not have been able to afford it otherwise.

The potential drawbacks of using AI-powered attorneys include concerns about the ability of the technology to fully understand and apply the complexities of the law, as well as the potential for bias or lack of empathy in the legal defense.

To ensure fair and just trials for defendants, AI technology can be utilized in conjunction with human attorneys to provide additional information and support, rather than being used to replace human attorneys entirely. Additionally, measures can be taken to ensure that the AI technology is not biased and is programmed to consider all relevant factors in the defense of the accused.

The implementation of AI technology in legal defense may lead to a shift in the roles and responsibilities of human attorneys. Attorneys may need to adapt their skills to include knowledge of AI technology and its use in the legal system, and may need to work closely with AI-powered attorneys to provide the best defense for their clients.

Additionally, human attorneys will still be responsible for providing the personal touch and advocacy that is necessary in the legal system. This includes building a relationship with the client, understanding the client's needs and concerns, and communicating effectively with the client and the court. Human attorneys will also be responsible for making strategic decisions, such as which legal arguments to pursue and whether to accept a plea deal or go to trial.

Another important aspect to consider is the ethical implications of using AI-powered attorneys. One of the main concerns is that AI-powered attorneys may not be able to provide the same level of empathy and understanding that human attorneys can. Additionally, there may be concerns about the accountability of AI-powered attorneys if something goes wrong. These ethical concerns must be addressed to ensure that the use of AI-powered attorneys does not compromise the rights and fair treatment of defendants.

Overall, the use of AI-powered attorneys in legal defense can bring many benefits, but it is important to ensure that the technology is used in a responsible and ethical manner, and that human attorneys continue to play a critical role in the legal system."

In my opinion this answer of ChatGPT is relevant.

Absolutely relevant. ChatGPT suggests its better to have a mix i.e human+AI based attorney.

Nkoro Ebuka Chinaechetam ,

While the answer provided by ChatGPT provides a reasonable argument it does not fully understand the question and its implication. The reason why ChatGPT gives this answer is that it has been written in articles that have been ingested by the algorithm, but does not supply real world expertise. The answer should not have been posted here.

Now to answer your question directly, AI cannot launch a detailed cross examination as a lawyer does, the reason being is that while useful case law can provide the basis of the argument, the specific details of the evidence and circumstances surrounding the case will make the difference. My experience as expert witness in court has shown me this and doing experimental work with neural networks, not reading a book or ingesting references as ChatGPT.

A good cross examination relies on the ability of the lawyer to have knowledge of the facts and react and adapt quickly to the answers the witness is providing. I had the wonderful opportunity to work with many lawyers (on both sides) whom I interacted in direct and cross examination. The distinctive feature of those whom I look up to is their knowledge and ability to adapt to the information I was giving them as an expert witness.

AI can serve to search relevant case law and good templates for defense that are not biased and most likely thorough. But the question to anyone reading this is: would you rely on an attorney that uses a template?

Now, A good use of AI in trials is the adherence to trial proceedings. Something which AI would do in an unbiased and more through way.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer

To directly answer your question lets keep chatgpt aside just for 30 seconds, I would not rely on templates. Especially knowing that the law is dynamic and the judge has more legal experiences than an AI trained model. I would rather have a lawyer that can fall back to AI trained models in a very smart, fast, and intelligent way to defend my case.

Likewise, I am not a lawyer either.

Observing the demeanour of parties go a long way and how does AI achieve this.