JK Rowling

Rank 24 of 47
|
Score 30
12/14/2025, 2:21:34 PM
X
In reply to:
Dr. Bendor Grosvenor 🇺🇦
@arthistorynews
·
50d
@jk_rowling I was surprised to discover that official judicial guidance says it’s perfectly fine for judges to use AI. They shouldn’t be going near it.
J.K. Rowling
@jk_rowling
·
50d
Nobody's surprised when sloppy students use AI shortcuts, or when internet activists intentionally or accidentally propagate falsehoods, but we're supposed to be able to trust the judiciary. This is absolutely scandalous behaviour coming from a judge. 4/X
J.K. Rowling
@jk_rowling
·
50d
The Swedish study found that trans-identified men have the same pattern of criminality as other men regarding violence and sexual offending. However, Kemp claims these men are no more likely to be violent or predatory than women.

3/4
J.K. Rowling
@jk_rowling
·
50d
Kemp used at least one completely bogus quote in his ruling. It's also being suggested, per the Times, that he 'used AI to research other cases.'

But there's worse. Kemp misrepresents a Swedish study that looked at the pattern of criminality among trans-identified men.

2/4
J.K. Rowling
@jk_rowling
·
50d
This is plain disturbing.

Judge Alexander Kemp, who presided over the Sandie Peggie tribunal, 'has been urged... to withdraw his findings and consider his position after it emerged that his ruling was “riddled” with errors and inaccuracies.'

1/4
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/scot…

The statement criticizes a judge for not double-checking information, implying negligence. It engages in public discourse by addressing the use of AI in judicial processes and the accuracy of legal judgments.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement suggests harm by implying the judge's negligence, which could undermine trust in the judiciary. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It respects privacy but indirectly questions the judge's competence, which could affect dignity. [-1]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement is critical but lacks constructive dialogue, focusing on blame rather than solutions. [-1]