Artificial intelligence can now create convincing photographs, videos, and audio recordings of events that never occurred. These fabricated materials—commonly called “deepfakes”—are becoming easier and less expensive to produce.

For individuals involved in a divorce or child custody dispute, this technology raises a troubling question: Can somebody create false digital evidence and attempt to use it in family court?

Deepfakes also create the opposite problem. A person confronted with an authentic recording may claim that it was generated by artificial intelligence. Courts must increasingly determine whether digital evidence is genuine without allowing unsupported accusations about AI manipulation to derail a case.

What Is a Deepfake?

A deepfake is an image, video, or audio recording created or materially altered through artificial intelligence. The technology can potentially make it appear that someone:

  • Said something they never said
  • Appeared at a location they never visited
  • Engaged in conduct that never happened
  • Sent a message or participated in a conversation that did not occur

According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, modern generative AI can transform photographs and other source material into realistic synthetic content quickly and at relatively little cost.

While manipulated photographs and edited recordings are not new, AI can make the alterations considerably more convincing.

How Deepfakes Could Affect a Family Law Case

Family law cases frequently depend on evidence concerning what happened outside the courtroom. Photographs, text messages, voicemail recordings, home-security footage, social media posts, and cellphone videos may all become important.

Deepfake or artificially manipulated material could potentially be offered to support allegations involving:

  • Domestic violence or threatening behavior
  • Alcohol or illegal drug use
  • Inappropriate conduct around children
  • Violations of a parenting plan
  • Hidden relationships or marital misconduct
  • The location of a parent or child at a particular time
  • A parent’s mental condition or behavior
  • Statements supposedly made by a parent
  • Spending, employment, or financial activity

Digital evidence can influence decisions involving custody, parenting time, credibility, property division, and support. Additional information about these issues is available in our discussion of best practices for authenticating and disputing digital evidence.

Is Deepfake Evidence Admissible in Court?

A deepfake should not be admissible to prove that a fabricated event actually occurred. The more difficult question is determining whether disputed material is genuine.

Evidence generally must be relevant and properly authenticated before a court may consider it. Authentication ordinarily requires enough supporting information for the court to find that the item is what its proponent claims it to be.

Although state evidence rules vary, Federal Rule of Evidence 901 illustrates the traditional authentication requirement. Evidence can potentially be authenticated through a witness with personal knowledge, distinctive characteristics, evidence describing a reliable process, or other supporting information.

A person who offers a video may therefore need more than the video itself. Relevant authentication evidence could include:

  • Testimony from the person who recorded it
  • The original file rather than a forwarded copy
  • Metadata showing when and how the file was created
  • The device used to make the recording
  • Cloud-storage or platform records
  • Testimony from individuals who witnessed the event
  • Other messages or records that corroborate the recording
  • Analysis by a qualified digital-forensics professional

The precise requirements depend on the jurisdiction, the type of evidence, and the circumstances surrounding its creation.

Courts Are Examining Special Rules for AI-Generated Evidence

The federal judiciary has been studying whether existing evidence rules adequately address deepfakes and other AI-generated material. A March 2026 report from the United States Courts discussed continued consideration of a potential addition to Rule 901 establishing a procedure for challenging evidence suspected of being a deepfake.

This does not mean that every state has adopted a special deepfake rule. Family courts generally apply their own state evidence statutes, court rules, and reported decisions. Existing principles concerning relevance, authentication, hearsay, expert testimony, and unfair prejudice may still control.

Because the law continues to develop, parties should not assume that merely labeling something a deepfake will keep it out of court.

The “Liar’s Dividend”: Calling Genuine Evidence Fake

Deepfake technology creates a second evidentiary danger sometimes described as the “liar’s dividend.” Once people know that convincing synthetic content exists, someone confronted with genuine evidence may simply claim that it is fake.

For example, a parent shown an authentic voicemail or home-security recording might argue that AI created the voice. A spouse confronted with an actual video could claim that another person manufactured it.

A bare accusation may not be enough. The person challenging the evidence may need to identify a credible reason to believe it was altered. Relevant considerations might include:

  • Visible or audible inconsistencies
  • Conflicting metadata
  • Breaks in the chain of custody
  • The absence of an original file
  • Unexplained editing or compression
  • Conflicting platform or device records
  • Findings from a digital-forensics examination
  • Evidence that the supposed event could not have happened

Courts must balance two genuine risks: admitting fabricated evidence and rejecting authentic evidence merely because AI could theoretically have created it.

What Should You Do If You Suspect a Deepfake?

If you believe that someone has created or altered evidence in your family law case, preserve the material and speak with your attorney promptly. Avoid editing, cropping, annotating, or repeatedly converting the file.

Useful steps may include:

  1. Preserve the original file. A screenshot, social-media download, or forwarded copy may contain less information than the original.
  2. Document where it came from. Record who provided it, when it was received, how it was transmitted, and whether other versions exist.
  3. Preserve related communications. Emails, text messages, cloud notifications, and social-media messages may help establish the file’s history.
  4. Do not alter your own devices. Deleting accounts, resetting a phone, or removing files could destroy information needed to determine authenticity.
  5. Consider formal discovery. An attorney may seek the original device, native files, platform records, account data, or testimony from the person who supposedly created the evidence. Our guide to discovery in divorce discusses some of the methods used to obtain electronic evidence.
  6. Determine whether an expert is necessary. A qualified digital-forensics professional may examine metadata, file structure, compression history, device information, and indications of manipulation.

Automated deepfake detectors can be useful, but they are not necessarily conclusive. The NIST guidance on reducing risks posed by synthetic content discusses multiple methods, including content detection, provenance information, metadata, and digital watermarks. Authentication may require several sources of information rather than reliance on one online detection tool.

How Can You Help Authenticate Genuine Evidence?

If you possess a genuine photograph, recording, or video that may become important, retain the material in its original form. Avoid sending the only copy through applications that compress or modify files.

You may also want to preserve:

  • The phone, camera, or computer that created the file
  • The original memory card or storage location
  • Automatic cloud backups
  • Messages sent immediately before and after the recording
  • The names of witnesses who observed the event
  • Platform records reflecting when the content was uploaded
  • Receipts, location records, or other corroborating evidence

Parties should also be careful about social-media activity during litigation. Even authentic posts can be misunderstood or presented without context. Our article on how social media can affect a divorce provides additional information.

Could Creating Fake Evidence Have Legal Consequences?

Knowingly creating or submitting fabricated evidence can cause significant damage to a party’s case. Depending on the conduct and applicable law, possible consequences could include:

  • Exclusion of the evidence
  • Loss of credibility
  • Monetary sanctions
  • An award of attorney’s fees
  • Adverse evidentiary findings
  • Contempt proceedings
  • Civil claims
  • Potential criminal investigation

The consequences will depend on the jurisdiction and what the person did with the fabricated material. Creating a parody for entertainment is very different from manufacturing false evidence and presenting it to a court.

Frequently Asked Questions About Deepfakes in Family Court

Can a screenshot prove that a recording is genuine?

Not necessarily. A screenshot may show what appeared on a screen, but it usually does not contain all the information available in the original file or device. Courts may consider the screenshot along with witness testimony and other corroborating evidence.

Can an AI-detection website conclusively prove that something is fake?

Usually not by itself. Detection tools can produce incorrect or uncertain results. A more complete examination may consider metadata, provenance, devices, witnesses, platform records, and forensic analysis.

Can I refuse to provide my phone if the other party claims a file is fake?

That depends on the discovery request, the issues in the case, applicable privacy protections, and the court’s orders. A party should speak with an attorney before deleting information, refusing a request, or turning over an entire device.

What if my former spouse falsely claims that an authentic recording is AI-generated?

Preserve the original recording, the device, related communications, cloud copies, and any corroborating evidence. Your attorney can evaluate how to authenticate the material and respond to the allegation.

Should I post the suspected deepfake online to prove what the other party is doing?

Generally, public accusations during active litigation can create additional problems. Preserve the material and discuss it privately with your attorney before posting or distributing it.

Speak With a Family Law Attorney About Digital Evidence

Deepfakes add a new layer of complexity to divorce and child custody litigation. The existence of AI-generated content does not mean that courts will disregard photographs, videos, or recordings. It does mean that preserving originals, documenting the source, and carefully authenticating disputed evidence are increasingly important.

If digital evidence, manipulated media, or allegations involving a deepfake could affect your family law case, the attorneys at Stange Law Firm, PC can help you understand your options. Contact Stange Law Firm online or call 855-805-0595 to schedule a confidential consultation.

Keywords: deepfake evidence in divorce, AI-generated evidence in child custody, artificial intelligence in family court, fake video evidence, fake audio recording, authenticating digital evidence, challenging electronic evidence.