FILE - Stacey Wales, sister of the late Christopher Pelkey, displays her brother's image at her mother's home, May 7, 2025, in Chandler, Ariz. (AP Photo/Matt York, File)
An Arizona man’s 10-year manslaughter sentence is good as gone. And social media can’t stop talking about one aspect of the case: an AI video of the deceased victim. It was introduced before the court was set to impose punishment onGabriel Paul Horcasitas. He’s convicted of the 2021 shooting death of 37-year-old Christopher Pelkey.
Christopher Pelkey’s family used AI to create a video of his likeness to give him a voice. Pelkey’s sister, Stacey Wales, raised the idea of her brother speaking for himself after struggling to figure out what he would say.
Jessica Gattuso is an attorney who represented victims in the case, while Kristen Reller was Gabriel Paul Horcasitas’s lawyer. Reller had argued that Superior Court Judge Todd Lang violated due process protections by relying on AI evidence. Gattuso and prosecutors told the appeals court that the lower-court judge didn’t err, saying the footage accurately represented Pelkey’s character.
Stacey Wales expected an appeal on the sentence. But after the court overturned the 10-year sentence, she expressed her disappointment that theAI video was being cited as the decision. Her only goal, she said, was to humanize her brother for the judge.
“It feels unfair because there is a convicted murderer sitting in prison that has blankets and walls of protection around their rights. Where are the rights for the victim?” Wales said.
A victim appeals lawyer has told the family that using AI again could result in another appeal.
“We will continue to let his voice be heard in whatever allowable medium we can convey that through the court system,” Wales said.
Authorities say Horcasitas, 55, fatally shot Christopher Pelkey during a November 2021 road rage encounter at a stoplight in Chandler. Horcasitas shot unarmed Pelkey after he got out of his truck and walked toward Horcasitas’ vehicle. A jury convicted Horcasitas of manslaughter in Pelkey’s death. Also, he was convicted of endangerment for a gunshot that struck another vehicle at the intersection during the encounter.
The AI-generated victim impact statement was played during a May 2025 sentencing hearing. This was after nine of Christopher Pelkey’s family members and friends stood before the judge describing how emotionally devastated they were by his killing.
The AI rendering of Pelkey said he wished he could still be with his friends and family. Also, it voiced a belief in forgiveness and said it was a shame Gabriel Paul Horcasitas had encountered him because “in another life, we probably could have been friends.”
The video didn’t request a specific prison sentence. While AI use within the court system is expanding, it’s typically been used for administrative tasks, legal research and case preparation. In Arizona, it’s helped inform the public of rulings in significant cases.
But using AI to generate victim impact statements marks a new tool for sharing information with the court outside the evidentiary phases. Gabriel’s lawyer Reller told the appeals court that the AI video doesn’t disclose who wrote the words used by the AI version of Pelkey. Also, there was no evidence that its contents accurately reflected Pelkey’s views. It also had an “undue emotional weight.” And it conveyed an authenticity that wouldn’t have been there had a family member read the same words aloud, Reller said.
Ahead of the latest ruling, Horcasitas’ lawyer Reller claimed the judge weighed the statements made in the AI-generated video when deciding on a sentence. However, prosecutors argued Judge Lang didn’t consider the footage when issuing the punishment. Shortly before delivering the sentence, the judge commented that he “loved that AI.” However, he didn’t say from the bench whether the video factored into his decision. Lang said he felt Pelkey’s “obvious forgiveness of Mr. Horcasitas reflects the character I heard about today.”
Meanwhile, the family’s lawyers say the judge already had plenty of relevant information from Pelkey’s family and friends before the AI video. They added that nothing in the video was inflammatory. Horcasitas’ attorney didn’t object to the AI video at the time.
In a decision released Wednesday (Sept. 30), the Arizona Court of Appeals concluded Horcasitas must be resentenced for the shooting death because the AI video wasn’t reliable. The court found the video crossed the line, saying it didn’t reflect actual events. Also, the court said it presented statements made in the footage as coming directly from the victim.
“Indeed, rather than document an event or recording a particular moment, the AI video presents a depiction of the victim and his thoughts created from the imaginings of the victim’s sister,” the three-judge panel wrote.
Also, Horcasitas’ appellate lawyer argued her client had no meaningful opportunity to rebut material in the AI-generated video. It’s unclear whether attorneys or the court were aware of the AI video in advance. But attorneys representing Pelkey’s family cited Arizona law in court records. They said it does not require victims to disclose statements they plan to make in court to prosecutors, defense attorneys or the judge. Also, victims can exercise their rights by speaking before the court or submitting written or recorded statements on audio or video.
Jessica Gattuso and Kristen Reller declined to comment Thursday on the decision. In a statement Thursday, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office said its prosecutors knew the victim’s family would address the court during sentencing. However, it wasn’t aware of its nature.
Associated Press writers Jacques Billeaud and Mikella Schuettler contributed to this report via AP Newsroom.
