Australian advocate reports distress from nonconsensual deepfake videos
An Australian advocate described panic and sustained distress after discovering sexual deepfake videos bearing her identity. Earlier abuse involved edited still photographs. This record concerns the later AI-video episode, which was already reported in September 2018.
- AI system
- Unidentified video tool
- Occurred
- Event date unknown
- Reported
- 19 September 2018
- Event location
- Unknown
- What the AI did
- Depicted or impersonated the person
- Reported harm
- Psychological DistressExploitation or Abuse
- Whose AI use
- Someone else’s AI use
- Setting
- Identity · Privacy
- Evidence
- AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account
- 3 claims: 3 reported. 3 open questions
- People reported harmed
- 1 person
AI system as recorded: Unspecified deepfake video tool
Reported harm
The advocate reported distress and nonconsensual sexual impersonation.
Outcome
UnknownMedia Coverage
What remains unknown
- The start date is unresolved. Dazed says videos appeared within the preceding year; ELLE’s relative chronology is inconsistent.
- The earlier edited stills are not independently established as AI-generated.
- The creator and software are unknown. No employment loss is established.
What the evidence supports
AI involvement: reported. Both accounts explicitly describe her videos as deepfakes. Generic software examples do not identify the tool used against her.
3 claims: 3 reported. What the statuses mean
Reported The advocate described panic and distress after finding fabricated sexual videos identified as depicting her.
Causal attribution. Participant account; independent verification of the reported consequence is unavailable.
- elle.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
Opening account of the email and discovery, then the paragraph describing continuing pain (L35-L39 and L56).
Reported Dazed had reported her deepfake-video abuse by 19 September 2018.
Causal attribution. Reporting date only; the start of the video abuse is unresolved.
- dazeddigital.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
Publication date and opening paragraphs on Noelle Martin (L37-L62).
Reported She later described feeling more positive as she reclaimed control through advocacy.
Causal attribution. Self-described improvement, not a clinical outcome.
- elle.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
Closing personal-account paragraphs (L57-L58).
Sources
2 sources inspected, from 1 underlying account. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.
- ELLE, first-person account as told to Daniella Scott(opens in new tab)
s1 · elle.com · First person account · English · Inspected · 6 February 2020 · Shares an underlying account with another listed source · Primary
- journalistic_interview(opens in new tab)
s2 · dazeddigital.com · Journalistic interview · English · Inspected · Shares an underlying account with another listed source
How the sources were read, and where the events happened
English as-told-to account read directly after the web reader failed. Technical background and the article’s inconsistent chronology are not adopted as facts about her particular case. Applies to s1.
English interview read directly. Same affected person as the later ELLE account. Applies to s2.
Event countries: Unknown. Affected-person countries: Australia. Court countries: Unknown.
ELLE’s first-person account locates the speaker in Australia. The location of the video’s creation or her initial discovery is not established.
Reviewed for publication 2026-09-25: Concrete adverse experience with a core person relation. Claims remain attributed to their sources. Technical and causal limits are recorded.
People reported harmed in this case
1 person
0 AI participants · 1 other person harmed
One advocate. Other people mentioned in the sources are separate accounts.
Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.
Cite this case
Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.
APA
NOPE. (2026). Australian advocate reports distress from nonconsensual deepfake videos. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2018-australia-advocate-deepfake-video-abuse
BibTeX
@misc{2018_australia_advocate_deepfake_video_abuse,
title = {Australian advocate reports distress from nonconsensual deepfake videos},
author = {NOPE},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {AI incidents},
url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2018-australia-advocate-deepfake-video-abuse}
} Related cases
Campaigner reports panic and withdrawal from activism after sexual deepfake abuse
A campaigner described panic after discovering a sexual deepfake of herself in 2020. Reporting also describes threats and disclosure of her addresses. She temporarily stepped back from activism. The account attributes the effects to the combined harassment; the video’s individual contribution is unknown.
Indian journalist reports acute distress and a hospital visit after sexual deepfake abuse
An Indian journalist later reported acute distress and a hospital visit after a sexual deepfake of her circulated in April 2018. The generation tool and clinical records were not inspected.
Rajasthan: a social-media influencer's video of a Ganga dip at Haridwar was manipulated with AI into an objectionable reel that went viral; she says she is mentally disturbed and cannot leave her house, and filed a cyber-crime complaint on 16 September 2026
A Rajasthan social-media influencer visited Haridwar with her family in June 2026 and on 6 June uploaded to Instagram a short video, recorded by relatives, of herself taking a dip in the Ganga at Har Ki Pauri wearing a salwar suit. About two months later she found that the video had been manipulated with AI into an objectionable version showing the same movements with her face and body portrayed 'in a shameful manner'; the fake reel went viral in the week before 20 September and drew objectionable comments and re-sharing. In a public appeal she asked whoever uploaded it to remove it, saying it was a matter of her dignity, that she was mentally very disturbed and had reached a point where she could not step out of her house. She filed a complaint with the cyber-crime police on 16 September 2026; the investigating Rajasthan Police Service officer said they were trying to identify who created and circulated the video and to have it removed, and that identifying the accused would take time. Dainik Bhaskar's English edition reported the case on 20 September in a 'Sunday Big Story' that does not name her.
São Paulo: a 37-year-old influencer used AI 'deepfake' tools to insert photographs of young women and adolescent girls of the Congregação Cristã do Brasil, taken from their social-media profiles without consent, into sexualised videos set inside churches; a 16-year-old and a 17-year-old filed police reports and the Civil Police investigate under the child-protection statute
A humorist and tyre repairer from Lençóis Paulista, São Paulo state, who posts on YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and TikTok as an impersonator of a television presenter, used AI tools to turn photographs that young women and adolescent girls of the Congregação Cristã do Brasil (CCB) had posted from inside churches into videos in which they appear dancing sensually beside women in short skirts, with the presenter inserted and the influencer commenting on their clothes. A 16-year-old congregant and her parents went to the 8ª Delegacia de Defesa da Mulher in São Paulo in February 2026; g1 made the case public on 22 April 2026 and Folha de S.Paulo confirmed the investigation. The girl told g1 the photograph had been taken in 2025 in front of the altar of a CCB church, that she was very shy, had not wanted to be exposed and was afraid the exposure would affect her social life, and that she had stopped taking photographs of herself; her family sued for moral damages. On 30 April 2026 the mother of a second girl, aged 17, registered a police report at the 4ª DDM Norte; g1 reported that the exposure had affected the girl psychologically. The São Paulo Civil Police investigate under article 241-C of the Estatuto da Criança e do Adolescente (simulating a sex or pornography scene with a minor by digital means) and for defamation of adult women in the videos; the inquiry was sent at the prosecutor's request to Lençóis Paulista, where the suspect lives, and the total number of people depicted was still being established. The influencer admitted making the videos with AI, said through his lawyer that they were satire and criticism of customs in a context of humour, said he did not know some of those depicted were minors, denied in his police statement linking the adolescent's image to sexualised content and said he had taken her for an adult, and posted an apology video (dated 5 April by g1's first report, which says it does not mention the deepfakes; described as posted after his police statement in g1's second report). The CCB said it had identified him, was taking internal measures and supports legal measures by the authorities. No later development was found on 2026-09-22.
If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.