Grief can act is unexpected ways but that sounds manipulative, impersonal and cold.

The statement should be of the effect on the bereaved family, not a projection onto the deceased, of their own feelings.

Worse, asking a computer to concoct it, is weak, insincere and frankly, rather cowardly.

I appreciate they would have found it very hard, but if they wanted to express sincerely how they imagine the deceased might have felt, they should have had the courage and common decency to write it personally from their own knowledge of him.

Not contract the task to a mere computer that has no feelings and can "know" nothing of the man and his family beyond hard facts like ages and relationships.

It would have been better not to have written anything.

I don't think that should be admissible because if the victim is dead the family should not be able to speak for the victim stating the victim's feelings that is the family's feelings and if they decide to forgive him that's their business but don't try to push that agenda in court through AI

Was this upsetting to watch or what it cathartic ? He was obviously a religeous person with strong beliefs, would others be able to be so positive - if you havent got anything positive to say, dont say anything at all.

Evil 🙏

Algorithmic code processing in a computer system, AI needs truthful definition, just another fictional character, needing relief to exist

NOBODY speaks for me. Especially about something this intense and personal

I would haunt everyone in perpetuity 👻

No. Just no. This is creepy. And wrong.

We can be sure that this wasn't his final thought... if he had one at all. And there is no actual speaking from the grave.

This has no place in the legal process, especially a court trial.

Why on earth was that allowed in court?