The film says justice has always worked best for those who can pay. Anthony Ray Hinton’s case is the one that made that sentence real for me. Convicted for two 1985 murders he did not commit. The only evidence was ballistics, and the bullets never matched his gun. His lawyer wrongly believed he had only 1,000 dollars to hire an expert. Nearly 30 years on death row. Then in April 2015, new tests showed the bullets did not come from his gun, and he walked free. Same evidence. The only thing that changed was that someone finally looked again. That is the part I keep returning to. Verdict quality should not depend on whether a second look fits the budget. Now multiply that problem by AI agents making millions of deals a day. Most disputes will be too small for any court to bother with, and too important to the people inside them to ignore. To me the logic of @GenLayer is easy to follow: one reviewer can miss what another catches. A dispute goes to many independent AI validators, each reviews the evidence on its own, and they reach a verdict together, in minutes and at a fraction of the cost of a court. If the agent economy is coming anyway, the second look has to come with it. How many independent reviews of the evidence would you want before you trusted a verdict on your own dispute? #JusticeNeedsAnUpgrade#