I was puzzled this week at the reaction to a bomb of a story by the Wall Street Journal. The paper’s rightfully cautious lawyers allowed it to go to press and declare that 131 federal judges had broken the law by hearing cases in which they or their families had a direct financial interest.
Getting Closer to the Truth
What conveys the truth more effectively?
A snapshot of a person’s values and accomplishments in the form of a quotation? Or a long essay about that person that will contain the short clip but surround it with other facts that could contradict or water down the single line (or build on the quote and infuse
When Investigations are Like Playing Billiards
For anyone who has ever tried to play pool, it quickly becomes obvious that the best way to get the ball in the pocket isn’t always the most direct.
If there’s another ball in the way or the angle doesn’t work, redirecting the ball off one of the cushions can be the best option. Even
Why Your Investigator Should Have a Sense of Humor (Seriously)
In a partially hilarious, partially disturbing article this week in The Wall Street Journal, “Facebook Has No Sense of Humor,” the Editor in Chief of the satirical website The Babylon Bee related that two patently ridiculous “news” stories had recently been fact-checked by Snopes: The Onion’s “Shelling From Royal Caribbean’s M.S. ‘Allure’ Sinks Carnival
When Databases Fail Us
There is a widespread belief among lawyers and other professionals that investigators, armed only with special proprietary databases, can solve all kinds of problems other professionals cannot.
While certain databases are a help, we often tell our clients that even if we gave them the output of all the databases our firm uses, they would
Artificial Intelligence: Good and Evil All at Once, Just Like its Creators
Have you ever noticed that artificial intelligence always seems much more frightening when people write about what it will become, but then how it can seem like imperfect, bumbling software when writing about AI in the present tense?
You get one of each in this morning’s Wall Street Journal. The paper paints a horrific picture
AI and Legal Investigation: Seek the Good, Avoid the “Perfect”
Artificial intelligence doesn’t equal artificial perfection. I have argued for a while now both on this blog and in a forthcoming law review article here that lawyers (and the investigators who work for them) have little to fear and much to gain as artificial intelligence gets smarter.
Computers may be able to do a lot
Buying AI for Law Firms: Like a Trip to the Auto Show
An entire day at a conference on artificial intelligence and the law last week in Chicago produced this insight about how lawyers are dealing with the fast-changing world of artificial intelligence:
Many lawyers are like someone who knows he needs to buy a car but knows nothing about cars. He knows he needs to get
Artificial Intelligence: In Law, Logic Only Goes So Far
Do you ever wonder why some gifted small children play Mozart, but you never see any child prodigy lawyers who can draft a complicated will?
The reason is that the rules of how to play the piano have far fewer permutations and judgment calls than deciding what should go into a will. “Do this, not
AI in the Law Firm: The Ethics of Who’s Running the Show
We’ve had a great response to an Above the Law op-ed here that outlined the kinds of skills lawyers will need as artificial intelligence increases its foothold in law firms.
The piece makes clear that without the right kinds of skills, many of the benefits of AI will be lost on law firms because you