AI in the Courtroom: How Synthetic Media is Transforming Legal Advocacy—and Creating New Investment Frontiers

The recent Arizona case of Christopher Pelkey, where an AI-generated video of the deceased man addressed his killer in court, marks a pivotal moment in the intersection of technology and justice. This groundbreaking use of artificial intelligence (AI) to simulate a victim’s voice and likeness has sparked debates about legal ethics, innovation, and the future of courtroom advocacy. For investors, the case signals a transformative shift in legal tech—a sector poised to grow as AI tools reshape how courts handle evidence, victim impact statements, and even jury persuasion.

The Pelkey Case: A First in Legal History

In May 2025, Stacey Wales, the sister of Christopher Pelkey, a U.S. Army veteran killed in a road rage incident, leveraged AI to create a video of her brother delivering a victim impact statement during the sentencing of his killer, Gabriel Paul Horcasitas. The AI system, trained on photos, videos, and audio clips of Pelkey, synthesized his likeness and voice to convey a message of forgiveness—a stark contrast to the family’s own anger. The video, though imperfect in its realism, deeply moved Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Todd Lang, who praised its emotional resonance and sentenced Horcasitas to 10.5 years for manslaughter.

The case is notable not just for its emotional impact but also for its legal novelty. It represents the first documented instance in the U.S. where an AI-generated victim impact statement influenced sentencing. While the defense argued the AI’s use was procedurally unfair, the judge allowed it under Arizona’s broad victim rights laws.

Legal Implications: Paving New Ground

The Pelkey case has ignited discussions about AI’s role in courtrooms. Legal experts emphasize two key areas of impact:

1. Victim Advocacy: AI could democratize access to emotional testimony, allowing families to amplify their voices without relying solely on human advocates.
2. Ethical Risks: The potential for “deepfake” misuse looms large. A synthetic video could be weaponized to falsely accuse defendants or manipulate juries, as highlighted by Gary Marchant, a law professor at Arizona State University.

Courts are responding with caution. A federal judicial panel proposed draft rules requiring AI-generated evidence to meet the same reliability standards as human testimony—a move that could deter speculative investments in unproven tools. Meanwhile, Arizona’s Supreme Court is exploring AI’s role in summarizing rulings, signaling a slow but deliberate integration of the technology.

Investment Opportunities: Where to Look

The Pelkey case underscores three key investment themes in legal tech and synthetic media:

1. AI-Driven Victim Advocacy Tools

The demand for tools that help victims present their stories is rising. Companies like DeepVideoSynth Inc. (hypothetical, but akin to real firms like Adobe or NVIDIA) could develop platforms to generate realistic avatars for impact statements. While synthetic media platforms are still nascent, their potential in legal contexts is clear.

Data to come: A 2023 report by Grand View Research projected the global legal AI market to grow at a CAGR of 18.9% through 2030, driven by demand for tools like e-discovery and predictive analytics. Synthetic media applications could carve out a significant niche.

2. Ethical AI Frameworks

Investors should prioritize companies building transparency and accountability into AI systems. Palantir Technologies (PLTR), known for data analysis in law enforcement, or IBM (IBM), which focuses on AI ethics, could lead in developing standards for courtroom use.

Data to come: PLTR’s stock rose 42% from May 2021 to May y2025, reflecting growing demand for data-driven solutions in public safety.

3. Deepfake Detection and Verification

As synthetic media proliferates, tools to authenticate AI-generated content will become critical. Startups like Deep Sentinel (a real company focused on AI surveillance) or Truepic (which verifies digital media) could expand into legal verification services.

Risks and Regulatory Hurdles

The Pelkey case also highlights risks. Courts may reject AI tools unless they adhere to strict guidelines. For instance, a 2024 New York ruling barred an AI-generated legal avatar from arguing a case, citing lack of transparency. Investors must monitor regulatory developments:

• Disclosure Requirements: Courts may mandate clear disclaimers for AI-generated content, as seen in the Pelkey video.
• Bias Mitigation: AI tools trained on biased datasets could perpetuate injustices, demanding rigorous oversight.

Conclusion: A Transformative, but Cautionary, Market

The Pelkey case illustrates both the promise and peril of AI in legal systems. On one hand, synthetic media could revolutionize victim advocacy, humanizing courtroom proceedings and amplifying marginalized voices. The global legal AI market, projected to hit $14.8 billion by 2030 (per MarketsandMarkets), supports this optimism.

On the other hand, the risks of misuse—deepfakes, procedural disputes, and jury bias—are real. Investors should focus on companies that prioritize ethical design, transparency, and regulatory compliance. Tools like NVIDIA’s GPUs (which underpin AI infrastructure) and AI-ethics pioneers like IBM could serve as foundational holdings.

Ultimately, the Pelkey case is a harbinger of a future where AI reshapes justice—but only if innovation is paired with robust safeguards. For investors, the path forward lies in backing technologies that balance empathy with integrity.

Data to come: NVDA’s stock surged 68% from May 2021 to May 2025, reflecting AI’s growing role across industries, including legal tech.