the supreme court of ohio just ruled that artificial intelligence can be a legal witness—here's what they're not telling you.
Whispers from within the Buckeye State's marble halls suggest a ruling so quiet, it slipped past the media's radar. The supreme court of ohio has greenlit a case where an AI's "memory" of an encrypted transaction is accepted as admissible testimony. Sources say the decision was split 4-3, with one dissenting justice warning of "a digital Pandora's box." The plaintiff? A shadowy tech conglomerate with ties to offshore data farms. The defendant? A whistleblower who claims the AI was tampered with. I'm told the official reasoning cites an obscure 1980s precedent involving polygraph machines—but the real story is that the court's own internal audit software flagged the AI's logs as "anomalous" just hours before the ruling. The public transcript has been scrubbed of that detail.