Rapper Pras Michel’s Ex-Lawyer Defends AI Use in Criminal Trial

Grammy-winning artist Pras Michel is “grasping at straws” by claiming his lead lawyer provided faulty representation in an earlier criminal trial by relying on artificial intelligence, one of Michel’s lawyers testified.

Michel’s defense team used a generative AI program from EyeLevel.AI to supplement its legal research, but lawyers never would “take the responses and run with it,” the attorney, Alon Israely, said Thursday in DC federal court testimony.

Michel, a popular artist turned political influencer, last April was convicted of 10 criminal counts, including waging a back-channel lobbying campaign to end an investigation of Malaysian tycoon Jho Low.

His new legal team from ArentFoxSchiff is seeking a new trial based on allegations that his lead lawyer in the previous trial, David Kenner, offered deficient and ineffective assistance of counsel. That included Kenner allegedly using an experimental AI program to draft his closing argument. Michel has also argued a contempt charge sought by prosecutors against Kenner for allegedly leaking grand jury material created a conflict of interest for the attorney during the trial.

ArentFox attorneys have sought to portray Michel’s original legal team as wholly inexperienced to handle a white-collar trial, noting that Kenner assigned key pieces of the preparation to people who were not attorneys.

The Justice Department has argued that the evidence against Michel was “overwhelming” and that arguments that he received deficient counsel don’t hold water.

US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly held Thursday’s hearing to consider evidence in Michel’s motion for a new trial. Israely, who was a member of Kenner’s team, testified that information from EyeLevel.AI represented only a few minutes of Kenner’s roughly three-hour closing argument.

Testifying Thursday, Kenner admitted that his use of generative AI for the closing argument caused him to misattribute lyrics from a Puff Daddy song to Michel’s group, the Fugees. “I messed up,” Kenner said.

The court should grant a motion for a new trial if that amounts to ineffective assistance of counsel, Kenner added.

Kenner also denied that a flat fee arrangement with Michel influenced his work. He said he covered more than $1 million in expenses for the case that Michel still has not reimbursed him for. He said he considered Michel a “friend” and hoped his case could get reconsidered.

The case is USA v. Michel, Dist. Ct. D.C., No. 1:19-cr-00148, 1/11/24, 01/11/2024