{
  "id": 17923944,
  "title": "‘A serious failure’: CPS prosecutor cites imaginary case to high court after AI search",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/11/03/a-serious-failure-cps-prosecutor-cites-imaginary-case-to-high-court",
  "topic": "ai",
  "section": "AI",
  "published": "2026-11-03T06:00:40.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Guardian Technology",
    "slug": "guardian-technology",
    "url": "https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/nov/03/a-serious-failure-cps-prosecutor-cites-imaginary-case-to-high-court-after-ai-search"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "A senior CPS prosecutor cited an imaginary legal precedent during a high court case involving a child rape allegation, sparking concerns about AI errors in the justice system. Ravinder Dhillon, representing the Crown Prosecution Service, relied on an entirely fabricated case while arguing for the prosecution of a 11-year-old boy accused of raping his seven-year-old sister. This issue has been flagged by two senior high court judges as a \"serious failure\" and was traced back to an AI summary generated during an internet search. This marks the second known case involving the CPS admitting to using nonexistent legal authorities, most likely caused by AI. The incident adds to the growing number of AI-related errors in court proceedings, mostly due to unqualified individuals representing themselves, particularly in employment tribunal cases.",
  "summary": "Exclusive: Nonexistent precedent cited in alleged child rape case adds to dozens of AI-related errors plaguing court proceedings A senior crown prosecutor acting in a high court case cited an imaginary legal precedent in an error that has sparked fresh concerns about AI hallucinations infecting the justice system. Ravinder Dhillon, representing the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), referenced an…",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}