R v MD

Court of King's Bench of Alberta · AB · Canada · 2024-02-22 · 2024 ABKB 104 · 220314306Q1

AdmittedAlleged voice cloneaudiooffered by prosecutionchallenge: authenticitysensitive matter — ruling only

The complainant offered a cellphone recording of an inculpatory porch conversation. Defence suggested the male voice had been cloned. After a voir dire, the judge relied on the complainant’s evidence, voice comparison, and contextual fit, rejected AI fabrication, admitted the recording, and convicted.

Rules cited: Canada Evidence Act s.31.1

The court's finding, in its words

The judge found no evidence of tampering or AI fabrication and accepted the male voice as the accused.

Short verbatim extract (≤25 words) for identification; the judgment is linked below and is the record.

Decision: canlii.org
Read: 2026-09-07 · primary document read
Found via: Damien Charlotin deepfakes lead CSV (CC0), User brief named-case list
Notes: CanLII page could not be independently read by script; downloaded lead PDF copy was read; publication-ban status not confirmed from the live page.

No alleged media is hosted or linked. Where the court found material genuine or fabricated, the finding is the court's; where a party merely alleged it, this page says so. Publication restrictions have not yet been checked for this row. This record summarises a public court document or official publication and reports what it says; SafeLegalAI makes no findings of its own. Individuals and organisations are named only as they appear in that public record. Anyone named may send a right of reply, correction or contextual update (for example an appeal, vacatur or later disposition) via /report; we add a dated note where appropriate. Reply or correct this record.

compiled by the Cognesio LLP editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-07v0.1.1coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub