"Strange voice, strange face": cloning through artificial intelligence as a means of fraud

The subject of the study is the use of cloned voices and facial images to mislead individuals for the purpose of appropriating someone else's property. In such cases, the similarity of voice or appearance can create a false impression for the recipient about the true source of the request for money transfer. The recording itself may not contain a direct demand for transfer; such requests are often communicated separately, making preceding correspondence and subsequent actions of the victim relevant. The issues of qualifying the actions taken and the liability of individuals involved in creating and distributing such recordings, or providing access to electronic payment methods, require separate consideration. The analysis also includes the preservation of digital traces, the possibilities of expert examination, and establishing a connection between deception and the transfer of property. Preventive measures are associated with marking materials created by artificial intelligence, sharing information about fraudulent messages, and developing skills to verify requests for money transfers. Formal legal and comparative legal methods were used, supplemented by an analysis of published materials on fraud cases. The grounds for qualifying thefts and the conditions for the liability of participants were investigated, comparing Russian and foreign approaches to marking materials created by artificial intelligence. The analysis of cases demonstrated a link between the imitation of voice or appearance, the victim's deception, and the transfer of property. The scientific novelty of the research lies in clarifying the role of cloned voices and facial images in the mechanism of fraudulent deception. It is shown that imitation can be used to convey false information and to create the belief that the separately presented request or order originates from a specific individual. It is proposed to reflect both possibilities in judicial explanations. It is concluded that criminal legal qualification is determined by the actual method of property appropriation and the actions of participants, taking into account their intent. Establishing the significance of the recording requires its comparison with correspondence, testimonies of the victim, and information about the flow of funds. Preventive measures should include verifying whether the received order indeed originated from the named individual, adhering to the established procedure for approving payments, and sharing information about messages used for committing fraud.