The family of an Arizona road rage victim used her image to create a posthumous AI video played at her killer’s sentencing last year. Today, an appeals court overturned the sentence, calling the decision to allow the video a “fundamental error.”
Last May, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Todd Lang gave Gabriel Paul Horcasitas the maximum sentence for the fatal shooting of Christopher Pelkey, 37, on November 13, 2021. Horcasitas, 54, was convicted of involuntary manslaughter and endangerment.
The 10-and-a-half-year sentence was handed down after an AI-generated video was played in court in which a line from Pelkey expressed his “forgiveness” for Horcasitas.
On Wednesday, the Arizona Court of Appeals in Phoenix ordered a resentencing, writing that the video “clearly had an impact on the sentencing judge, who said he ‘liked’ the video and believed it ‘was authentic.’
“In this case, the judge’s review of the AI video was so damaging to Horcasitas that it rendered the sentencing process fundamentally unfair,” the appeals judges said. “Accordingly, we vacate the sentence for manslaughter and the pre-trial detention for re-sentencing.”
Horcasitas’ attorney, Kristen Reller, declined to comment on an active case. An attorney for Pelkey’s family did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
During sentencing in 2025, the AI version of Pelkey, created by his sister Stacey Wales, appeared to ask the judge for leniency.
“To Gabriel Horcasitas, the man who shot me: it’s a shame we met that day under such circumstances,” said the artificial version of Pelkey. “In another life, we probably could have been friends. I believe in forgiveness.”
Lang seemed moved by the presentation.
“I loved that AI. Thank you for that, and as angry as you are and rightly angry as the family is, I heard the forgiveness and I know Mr. Horcasitas appreciated it, but so did I,” Lang said during the hearing.
He added that he felt the video was “authentic, that his obvious forgiveness of Mr. Horcasitas reflects the character I heard (Pelkey) speak about today.”
“But it also says something about the family because you told me how angry you were and you demanded the maximum sentence, and even though that’s what you wanted, you allowed (Pelkey) to speak from his heart as you saw him,” Lang said. “I didn’t hear him ask for the maximum sentence.”
The defense had asked for the lowest sentence possible, but Lang imposed the maximum sentence, saying that despite Horcasitas’ “remorse” and his “legal life,” the loss described by Pelkey’s family “could not be deeper.”
According to the appeals court, Horcasitas argued that he did not receive due process because the sentencing court heard and relied on the AI video. The state countered that the video reflected what Pelkey’s sister thought he “would have said” and was “consistent” with Pelkey’s written account of his beliefs and values.
But the appeals court found that the video “crossed that line,” going from permissible to unduly prejudicial, noting that it “does not reflect the actual events.”
“Indeed, rather than documenting an event or recording a particular moment,” he said, “the AI video presents a representation of the victim and their thoughts created from the image of the victim and their thoughts.” imaginations of the victim’s sister.
Gn usa
