Report comment

It should not be surprising that a computer prediction will beat a lawyer's prediction, given the "facts" of the case; but law is not a game of chess. The problem is that very often no one knows what the facts are until trial, when the judge decides whose "facts" to believe.

Moreover, a computer can't influence a judge; a lawyer and witnesses can! Even given the computer's "ability" to predict, it is not very impressive when one realizes that (at 79% accuracy) it could predict that 100 cases in a given batch will fail when in fact 21 actually succeed. What a lawyer has to do is advise the client about the chances of success and do their best to win the case for the client; that has nothing to do with the lawyer's ability to predict the outcome of cases. Appeal Court judges often make decisions, predicting that they will be overturned in the Supreme Court!