Checklist · Criminal Law
Checklist: challenging or authenticating suspected AI-generated (deepfake) evidence
Step-by-step checklist for criminal matters where an image, video, audio or message may be AI-generated or altered: preservation, requests for originals, Evidence Act authentication and exclusion points, expert evidence and AI-detection limits.
- Kind
- Checklist. Steps or checks to work through and tick off.
- Where it applies
- New South Wales, Australia, United States
- AI use
- Yellow AI can help in set ways. A lawyer checks specific points before use.
- Law stated as at
- 17 October 2026
- Status
- Maintained. Checked against the cited sources on 17 October 2026.
- Version
- 1
- Source
- Written for this library
When to use it
Use when the prosecution relies on, or the defence wants to tender, digital media whose authenticity is in doubt, or when the client is charged with creating or sharing synthetic intimate material. It is a working checklist, not an expert opinion.
How AI may be used
AI-detection tools give probabilistic results and are not proof. The checklist relies on originals, metadata, chain of custody and a qualified expert; AI may help organise the material and compare versions.
AI may
- Build a table of each media item with its source, date received, hash, metadata fields and continuity gaps.
- Compare versions of a file and list visible differences for the expert to examine.
- Draft the request for native files and device data for the lawyer to settle.
AI must not
- Must not present an AI-detection score as evidence that material is or is not synthetic.
- Must not upload intimate images or other sensitive evidence to any AI tool, including detection services.
- Must not alter, enhance or re-encode the working copy used for analysis without recording it.
The lawyer checks
- The expert is qualified in digital forensics and was told of SC Gen 23 paras 20–24.
- Requests for originals and platform data have been made and diarised.
- The objection is framed under the correct Evidence Act provisions and supported by evidence, not assertion.
Method: how the Green, Yellow and Red levels are decided. This is guidance for planning, not legal advice.
Read the full text
The full text is for signed-in accounts. It is free. When you sign in you can:
- read the whole precedent, with its drafting notes beside it;
- copy it, or download it as a Word file or Markdown;
- add it to your firm’s knowledge base, so colleagues can find it;
- let the AI tools you connect read it from that knowledge base.
The summary, the law it rests on and the AI-use guidance above stay public. Privacy.
More in Criminal Law
- Bail application submissions (NSW release application)
- Letter of advice on the brief of evidence and plea options
- Representations to the DPP seeking charge resolution or withdrawal
- Sentencing submissions and guidance letter for character referees
- Application under s 14 of the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW)
- Protocol: AI-assisted review of the prosecution brief and digital evidence
All precedents for Criminal Law · Tasks and AI use in this area