When the Machine Gets It Wrong, Who Pays the Price?

Courts have been clear: artificial intelligence may assist lawyers, but it does not absolve them. When ASR systems miss testimony or AI summaries omit critical facts, responsibility does not vanish into the software. It lands squarely on the professionals who relied on it. As automation reshapes the legal record, a new reckoning over accountability is quietly approaching.

Who Trained the Machine?

AutoScript AI is marketed as a “legal-grade” AI transcription solution trained on “millions of hours of verified proceedings,” yet the company provides no public definition of what verification means in a legal context or where that data originated. Founded and led by technology executive Rene Arvin, the platform reflects a broader trend of general ASR tools being rebranded for legal use without the transparency traditionally required in court reporting.

Where the Record Is Really Being Written – A Quiet Transformation Hidden in Plain Sight

Courtrooms across America are quietly shifting from certified verbatim reporting to AI transcripts, digital recordings, and agency-controlled “roughs.” The result? Hearsay masquerading as the official record — with no clear custodian, no accountability, and enormous power flowing to private platforms. This isn’t just a professional issue; it’s a constitutional one. If we lose control of the record, we lose control of justice itself.

Martyrs and Pretenders – The Cost of False Narratives in Court Reporting

True martyrdom cannot be faked. Charlie Kirk’s assassination proved it — millions honored his memory without manufactured drama. In our field, however, certain personalities wrap themselves in a cloak of victimhood to shield self-interest. Reporters must see through that illusion. The real martyrs are the students, schools, and working reporters who quietly sacrifice every day to protect the record.