Form · Incoming evidence — deepfakes & synthetic documents
Production-set log for candidate synthetic or altered media
Log for marking items in a production, brief or client upload that need a lawyer's eye: missing native files, platform AI labels, inconsistent metadata, or a witness account that does not match the item.
- Kind
- Form. A form to complete, or a guide to completing an official one.
- Where it applies
- Commonwealth, New South Wales, Victoria, Australian Capital Territory, Northern Territory, Tasmania
- AI use
- Yellow You and the tool draft together, with you directing. You check every statement you rely on.
- Law stated as at
- 22 October 2026
- Status
- Maintained. Checked on 22 October 2026 against the 4 authorities it cites, for 6 jurisdictions.
- Version
- 1
- Source
- Written for this library
When to use it
Use while reviewing a production set, a subpoena bundle or a client's upload of images, audio, video or PDFs. One row per candidate. The log flags items for the authenticity checklist. It does not decide admissibility.
Used for these tasks
- Flag candidate synthetic or altered items in a production set
- Compare claimed source metadata with the file actually produced
Each task page says how far AI may help with the task and what the lawyer must review.
How AI may be used
An approved tool may group files by type and list blank metadata or filenames containing labels such as screenshot or generated, and a lawyer decides which rows stay on the log.
AI may
- List files by extension and flag those whose export shows no created time, no device field, or a filename containing a label the lawyer has set, such as screenshot or generated.
- Count how many items in the set have a native file stored beside the copy.
AI must not
- Must not score an item as likely to be a deepfake or as authentic.
- Must not open image, audio or video content in a public generative AI tool.
- Must not drop a row because the tool found no technical flag. The witness account can still put the item on the log.
The lawyer checks
- Every row states the reason it is on the log in the lawyer's words.
- Intimate or suppressed items are marked so they are not sent to a vendor or a public tool.
- Each row has a next step, or an express decision that no step is needed.
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 available after you log in. It is free. When you log 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 Incoming evidence — deepfakes & synthetic documents
- Deepfake and synthetic evidence authenticity checklist (images, audio, video and documents)
- Federal Court checklist: generative AI and evidentiary material
- Metadata comparison schedule for a digital file
- Letter requesting native files, metadata and device examination (Evidence Act s 167)
- NSW Supreme Court limits on generative AI in evidentiary material
- Letter instructing a digital forensics expert on suspected synthetic or altered media
- Protocol for exchange of native electronic files where authenticity is in issue
- NSW gate before compelled or suppressed material enters a generative AI program
- Client warning letter on AI-fabricated or altered evidence
- Letter asking that devices and native files be preserved
- NSW verification of citations and evidence references in written submissions
- Digital evidence intake and chain-of-custody record
- Response sheet: suspected non-consensual intimate deepfake
- Outline of submissions objecting to evidence suspected to be AI-generated or altered
All precedents for Incoming evidence — deepfakes & synthetic documents · Tasks and AI use in this area