The prosecution can hire more expert witnesses with excessive credentials than you can, and they will explain how there's a one in one trillion possibility that the system is wrong, and that the defendant is assuredly a monster.
Juries eat that up when it comes to bogus DNA, bite mark, fingerprint, or other forensic evidence claims. Most people think computers can't be wrong or biased, and people's perceptions of what can be deemed reasonable doubts or not seem to shift when computers are involved, or when smart, credentialed people tell them their reasonable doubts aren't reasonable at all because of that one in a trillion chance of the computers being wrong.
² - reason for the scare quotes is because I have first hand knowledge of non-CSAM content being in NCMEC’s database (most likely via data entry errors, but I can’t be for sure).
Ha! Come to think of it, I think that was one example. The main examples that came to memory (it’s been almost 8 years since I was involved) when discussing this last week were essentially extremely common photos (like the stock Windows XP background, among others).