Attentive people noticed that there was something amiss with images used for this "documentary." As always, it was the fingers and hair first giving it away and later research confirmed it: The "documentary" makers created A. I. images of a happy Jennifer throwing peace signs to indicate she was unbothered by the attack on her parents. This is shameful and dangerous both, as it falsifies reality.
There is no doubt Jennifer planned this heinous crime but that information, along with ACTUAL evidence, must be enough. What about other cases? Cases still on trial, or being investigated? There have been documentaries about ongoing and active cases, after all. Added issues are trial by media resulting in biased juries, and/or the fact that judges may be up for re-election and feel pressured to come to a certain verdict, all directly influenced by A. I. lies. We have already seen this type of corruption (Menendez case/Judge Weisberg) without A. I. and the latter may make things far worse because the more this technology advances, the more difficult it will be to tell the difference between fact and fabrication. Such images or even deep-faked video footage can severely impact a case to a magnitude we can't even fully calculate yet, in terms of ultimate ripple effect and results.
So yes, here comes a new low of people feigning to show us the unadulterated truth. The old adage "An image says more than a thousand words" has never fully held true to begin with but has now lost all meaning. I hope laws will be put in place to prevent misleading viewers and steering opinions in that manner in the future.
Also, and this has been said multiple times, the whole crockumentary was a sad and unsuccessful rip-off of the brilliant YouTube channel JCS Psychology whose creator both examined the case as well as the young offender's mental state. (The latter which this "documentary" entirely neglected.) To steal for monetary gain from a little YouTube channel is embarrassing enough but that with all that fantastic source material the end product was but a tedious, excruciatingly boring (and thanks to the A. I. issue factually dubious) affair is simply unforgivable.
There is no doubt Jennifer planned this heinous crime but that information, along with ACTUAL evidence, must be enough. What about other cases? Cases still on trial, or being investigated? There have been documentaries about ongoing and active cases, after all. Added issues are trial by media resulting in biased juries, and/or the fact that judges may be up for re-election and feel pressured to come to a certain verdict, all directly influenced by A. I. lies. We have already seen this type of corruption (Menendez case/Judge Weisberg) without A. I. and the latter may make things far worse because the more this technology advances, the more difficult it will be to tell the difference between fact and fabrication. Such images or even deep-faked video footage can severely impact a case to a magnitude we can't even fully calculate yet, in terms of ultimate ripple effect and results.
So yes, here comes a new low of people feigning to show us the unadulterated truth. The old adage "An image says more than a thousand words" has never fully held true to begin with but has now lost all meaning. I hope laws will be put in place to prevent misleading viewers and steering opinions in that manner in the future.
Also, and this has been said multiple times, the whole crockumentary was a sad and unsuccessful rip-off of the brilliant YouTube channel JCS Psychology whose creator both examined the case as well as the young offender's mental state. (The latter which this "documentary" entirely neglected.) To steal for monetary gain from a little YouTube channel is embarrassing enough but that with all that fantastic source material the end product was but a tedious, excruciatingly boring (and thanks to the A. I. issue factually dubious) affair is simply unforgivable.