---
title: "Deepfake and synthetic evidence authenticity checklist (images, audio, video and documents)"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/precedents/incoming-evidence-deepfakes-and-synthetic-documents/deepfake-evidence-authenticity-checklist"
type: "precedent"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "a44-deepfake-evidence-authenticity-checklist"
area_id: "A44"
kind: "checklist"
ai_level: "red"
version: 1
law_stated_as_at: "2026-10-17"
---

# Deepfake and synthetic evidence authenticity checklist (images, audio, video and documents)

> Step-by-step checklist for testing whether an image, recording, video, message or document has been generated or altered with AI before relying on it or challenging it: preserve, trace provenance, examine, corroborate,…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/precedents/incoming-evidence-deepfakes-and-synthetic-documents/deepfake-evidence-authenticity-checklist  
Law stated as at: 2026-10-17

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

Step-by-step checklist for testing whether an image, recording, video, message or document has been generated or altered with AI before relying on it or challenging it: preserve, trace provenance, examine, corroborate, and decide on expert and procedural steps.

## Key facts

- Kind: Checklist. Steps or checks to work through and tick off.
- Practice area: [Incoming evidence — deepfakes & synthetic documents](https://ailawframework.com/precedents/incoming-evidence-deepfakes-and-synthetic-documents.md)
- Jurisdictions: Australia, New South Wales, Victoria, United Kingdom (England and Wales), United States
- AI level: Red. Keep AI out of the decisive steps. A lawyer does the work.
- Law stated as at: 2026-10-17
- Status: Maintained. Checked on 2026-10-17 against the 8 authorities it cites, for 5 jurisdictions.

## When to use it

Use for any key digital exhibit, whether it comes from your client, the other side or a third party, and before it is served, tendered or challenged. Use it early: preservation steps cannot be done later.

## How AI may be used

Lawyer-led. AI may list the source, capture date, metadata fields, hashes and gaps against the authenticity questions the lawyer has set, but it must not be treated as determining whether an item is genuine.

**AI may:**

- From the file, list each exhibit's claimed source, capture date, metadata fields, hash values and custody gaps.
- Compare claimed author, date and device fields with the produced file's properties and list mismatches.
- From a permitted production set, list items with missing metadata, inconsistent formatting or reuse patterns as a sample for human review.

**AI must not:**

- Must not state that an item is or is not a deepfake or forgery.
- Must not alter, convert, compress or "enhance" any original file.
- Must not be used as an AI-detection tool whose output is relied on as evidence without expert validation and any required court leave or disclosure.

**The lawyer checks:**

- Originals are preserved with hash values and a complete chain of custody before any examination.
- Any conclusion on authenticity is based on expert evidence and corroboration, not a detector score.
- Court-specific AI disclosure and leave requirements for experts have been checked.

## Authorities

- [Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 48, 55 to 58, 135, 136, 146 and 147 (proof of contents of documents; relevance and provisional relevance; inferences as to authenticity; discretions; presumptions for machine-produced documents)](https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A04858/latest/text)
- [Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 166 to 169 (requests to produce, examine and test documents; orders on non-compliance)](https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A04858/latest/text)
- [Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) (corresponding provisions)](https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1995-025)
- [Federal Court of Australia, Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence Practice Note (GPN-AI), 16 April 2026, paras 4.7 to 4.12](https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/law-and-practice/practice-documents/practice-notes/gpn-ai)
- [Supreme Court of NSW Practice Note SC Gen 23 – Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI), paras 13 to 15 and 20 to 24](https://supremecourt.nsw.gov.au/documents/Practice-and-Procedure/Practice-Notes/general/current/PN_SC_Gen_23.pdf)
- [Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, Practice Direction: Use of Artificial Intelligence (PD-AI), 29 May 2026, paras 4.10 to 4.13](https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2026-05/fcfcoa_pd_-_use_of_artificial_intelligence_-_pd-ai_-_0526v1.pdf)
- [UK: Civil Procedure Rules r 32.19 (notice to prove a document)](https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32)
- [US: Federal Rules of Evidence 901 and 902(13), (14) (authentication; certified electronic records and data)](https://www.uscourts.gov/forms-rules/current-rules-practice-procedure/federal-rules-evidence)

## Official form

[Official form](https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/law-and-practice/practice-documents/practice-notes/gpn-ai)

## Full text and drafting notes

The full text and the drafting notes are not part of this public page. Signed-in firm accounts can read them at https://ailawframework.com/precedents/incoming-evidence-deepfakes-and-synthetic-documents/deepfake-evidence-authenticity-checklist and through the signed-in MCP connector https://ailawframework.com/mcp/firm.

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*