Attorneys using subpoena-obtained ChatGPT or AI chat transcripts as evidence at trial is an emerging trend, but it requires a radical rethinking of the evidentiary landscape and juror psychology. In a recent high-profile criminal case, ChatGPT transcripts suggesting the defendant might have had tendencies alluding to the crime were introduced. The judge declared a mistrial for various other reasons, and one juror subsequently told the press she was upset the transcripts were introduced, stating she uses ChatGPT and that taking apart the defendant's AI chat seemed an inappropriate intrusion unfairly used against him. Lawyers must consider how juries might react not only to the content of AI chat transcripts, but also to the very use and exposure of a person’s “private” AI chats.