California courts can exclude an AI deepfake video unless the proponent authenticates it under Evidence Code § 1401, and the judge finds it is what they claim it is. In criminal cases, deepfakes raise acute risks of misidentification, fabrication, and unfair prejudice, especially when presented as “caught on video” proof. This article explains how California
A suspected deepfake video can be excluded or sharply limited in a California civil case by timely evidentiary objections, targeted discovery, and expert authentication challenges under the Evidence Code. Deepfakes raise unique risks of fabrication, altered metadata, and misleading “reality cues” that can sway juries if not addressed early. This article explains a step-by-step California
Californians can challenge AI-generated evidence by attacking authentication, relevance, reliability, and prejudice under the California Evidence Code, and by invoking due process when the defense cannot meaningfully test the system. As AI outputs appear in criminal and civil cases—from deepfakes to automated “risk” scores—courts are being asked to decide what qualifies as trustworthy proof. This
