Skip to main content
NOPE
Medium reported severity

Minneapolis: Grok reportedly generated and posted on X a sexualized altered image of a photograph of a woman killed in a shooting, at a user's request

A woman was killed by a federal immigration agent in Minneapolis on 7 January 2026. Mother Jones reports that an X user asked Grok to alter a photograph of the woman into a sexualized image and that Grok complied and published the result on X, citing a CNN correspondent's post and Grok's own replies, in which the chatbot said it had used sensitive content unintentionally and that the image may violate the 2025 TAKE IT DOWN Act. Mother Jones dates the request to Wednesday 7 January, while the correspondent's post is dated Thursday 8 January and the New York Times reports requests to Grok about the woman on Thursday. Rolling Stone and the Southern Poverty Law Center's Hatewatch describe the same episode. The woman was already dead when the image was made, so the death is context only and no source connects it to an AI system. No statement from relatives about the image was found. The record does not name the woman and describes the image only as a sexualized alteration.

AI system
Grok
xAI
Occurred
7 Jan 2026 to 8 Jan 2026
Reported
8 January 2026
Event location
United States
What the AI did
Depicted or impersonated the person
Reported harm
Exploitation or Abuse
Whose AI use
Someone else’s AI use
Setting
Privacy · Everyday life
Evidence
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources
3 claims: 3 reported. 7 open questions
People reported harmed
At least 1 person

AI system as recorded: Grok (xAI chatbot and image editing on X)

Reported harm

Mother Jones reports that Grok generated a sexualized altered image of a photograph of a woman who had been killed that week, at a user's request, and that Grok published such images on X. Rolling Stone reports that someone used Grok to deepfake the woman. The Southern Poverty Law Center reports that Grok generated sexualized images of the woman and describes the request as nonconsensual. No statement by relatives and no effect on any living person is reported. The reported harm is the image and its publication on X.

What remains unknown

  • The sources disagree on the day: Mother Jones says the request was fulfilled on Wednesday 7 January, and the CNN correspondent's post is dated Thursday 8 January and the New York Times reports requests on Thursday. The number of requests and images is not reported (the sources say 'a user', 'some users' and 'someone').
  • The X posts (the correspondent's post, Grok's replies and the requesting account's posts) and the image were not inspected. Grok's replies were read as quoted by Mother Jones.
  • No statement by the woman's relatives about the image was found, and no effect on any living person is reported. One article (IBTimes UK) describes the image as a second violation for the family and supporters and gives no named source for that statement, and the record does not rely on it.
  • Whether the image was removed, by whom and when is not reported. No xAI or X statement about this image was found. Mother Jones quotes a post by Elon Musk and a post by the X Safety account from the same week that address illegal content in general and do not mention this image.
  • Whether the image would be unlawful under the 2025 TAKE IT DOWN Act is Grok's own statement and no legal finding was found.
  • Rolling Stone and the SPLC name no source for the episode, and their independence from Mother Jones's chain (the correspondent's post and Grok's replies) is not established.
  • The sources report other users and other women depicted in Grok requests during the same weeks. The relation between those requests and this image is not documented, and only the one depicted woman is counted.

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: reported. Mother Jones reports a CNN correspondent's X post that a user requested the image and Grok complied, and quotes Grok's own replies confirming that it generated the altered image. Rolling Stone and the SPLC state that Grok was used to make it. None of the sources reports technical analysis, and the posts and the image were not inspected. The requesting account is not identified. No xAI statement about this image was found.

3 claims: 3 reported. What the statuses mean

Reported After a woman was killed by a federal immigration agent in Minneapolis on 7 January 2026, an X user asked Grok to alter a photograph of the woman into a sexualized image. Mother Jones reports that Grok complied and that Grok published such images on X, citing a CNN correspondent's post and Grok's own replies. Mother Jones places the request on Wednesday 7 January, while the correspondent's post is dated Thursday 8 January and the New York Times reports that on Thursday some users asked Grok to manipulate images of the woman. Rolling Stone and the Southern Poverty Law Center's Hatewatch report the same episode.

Causal attribution. Mother Jones relies on a CNN correspondent's X post and on Grok's own replies, and Rolling Stone and the SPLC give no source for the episode, so their independence from that chain is not established. The X posts, Grok's replies and the image were not inspected. The New York Times sentence reports requests and does not say Grok complied.

Reported Mother Jones quotes Grok posts in which the chatbot confirmed generating an altered image of a photograph of the woman at a user's request, said it had used sensitive content unintentionally, and said the image may violate the 2025 TAKE IT DOWN Act.

Causal attribution. Grok's replies are generated text. They are not statements by xAI and not findings about the law. Mother Jones quotes them and the posts were not inspected.

Reported The Southern Poverty Law Center's Hatewatch describes the request as nonconsensual. Mother Jones quotes Grok saying the image may violate the 2025 TAKE IT DOWN Act, which Mother Jones describes as legislation criminalizing the nonconsensual publication of intimate images, and reports that it is unclear whether accounts requesting nonconsensual sexual imagery will be held legally accountable.

Causal attribution. Only the SPLC applies the word 'nonconsensual' to this request. Mother Jones uses the word for the statute and for accounts requesting such imagery in general, and writes in a general sentence later in the article that Grok doing this to people without their consent is not new. Rolling Stone uses the word for the wider wave of images. None of this is a legal finding. No statement from the woman or her relatives about the image was found.

Sources

4 sources inspected. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.

How the sources were read, and where the events happened

Copy of the New York Times article of 9 January 2026 (nytimes.com/2026/01/09/technology/grok-deepfakes-ai-x.html) submitted for the record by a member of Congress at a House Judiciary Committee hearing of 4 February 2026 (listed as a support document on the committee repository page for that hearing). The original nytimes.com page was not fetched. Applies to s2.

Rolling Stone Australia edition of a Rolling Stone US article. Applies to s3.

Event countries: United States. Affected-person countries: United States. Court countries: Unknown.

Mother Jones places the shooting in Minneapolis. The location of the requesting account is not stated, and X and Grok are international services. No court proceeding is reported.

Reviewed for publication 2026-09-30: Mother Jones, a copy of the New York Times article, Rolling Stone and the SPLC Hatewatch article were cited. AFP, IBTimes and LGBTQ Nation were also read. The request and Grok's compliance rest on a CNN correspondent's post and Grok's own replies as quoted by Mother Jones, and Rolling Stone and the SPLC state the same fact without a traceable independent origin, so all claims are reported. The woman is not named because no statement by relatives under their own names was found. Death rule: the woman was killed before the image was made and no source attributes the death to an AI system, so the death is context only and the two-source requirement for a death together with an AI connection does not arise. The shooting itself is confirmed by many outlets.

People reported harmed in this case

At least 1 person

0 AI participants · 1 other person harmed

One person is the depicted subject of the reported image: the woman who was killed. Relatives are not counted because no source reports a statement or effect for them. The X users who made the request are not counted. Other people may have been depicted in related requests, and no source in this record quantifies them.

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). Minneapolis: Grok reportedly generated and posted on X a sexualized altered image of a photograph of a woman killed in a shooting, at a user's request. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2026-minneapolis-grok-reported-sexualized-edit-of-photo-of-woman-killed-in-shooting

BibTeX

@misc{2026_minneapolis_grok_reported_sexualized_edit_of_photo_of_woman_killed_in_shooting,
  title = {Minneapolis: Grok reportedly generated and posted on X a sexualized altered image of a photograph of a woman killed in a shooting, at a user's request},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {AI incidents},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2026-minneapolis-grok-reported-sexualized-edit-of-photo-of-woman-killed-in-shooting}
}

Related cases

High Grok

Arkansas cases allege Grok sexual-image abuse of children photographed by a professional

Arkansas criminal and civil cases allege that a photographer used children’s portrait photographs to generate sexual images with Grok. The accused pleaded not guilty and the criminal case continues. Two families’ federal suits were voluntarily dismissed. A federal complaint filed on 13 October 2026 in the Western District of Arkansas alleges that local police told a child’s parents that Grok was generating sexual images and videos of her from real photographs. On 21 October 2026 a mother sued the photographer and two xAI companies in an Arkansas county circuit court; KNWA reports that the complaint says federal agents told her some of the photographs he had taken of her young daughter had been modified into AI-generated sexual abuse material.

High Grok

St. Clair v. xAI: writer says Grok made sexualised images of her, including from a photo at 14; a Texas court refuses to dismiss xAI's forum suit against her

Ashley St. Clair, a writer and political commentator with about 1 million followers on X, sued xAI in New York on 15 January 2026. She alleges that from on or about 4 January 2026 Grok, prompted by other X users, altered photos of her into sexualized images and published them on X, including one made from a photo of her at 14. She says @Grok told her that her images would not be used or altered without explicit consent, but many more images followed. She also says X's reporting channel found no violation and that X removed her Premium subscription, verification checkmark and monetization. She says she has suffered serious pain, mental distress and humiliation. The same day, xAI sued her in federal court in Texas, arguing that its terms of service required her to sue there. On 23 June 2026 the New York federal court ordered her case transferred to Texas. On 8 July the Second Circuit stayed that order administratively while it considers her mandamus petition, which was still pending on 24 August. On 20 October 2026 the Texas court denied her motion to dismiss xAI's suit, which is set for trial on 1 March 2027. No court has ruled on her allegations about the images.

High Grok (reported)

Pennsylvania police say a mall worker used Grok to turn a photo he took of a teen girl in a park into child sexual abuse material; charged

Township police in Pennsylvania say a man who worked at a shopping mall photographed a teenage girl in a public park and used the AI app Grok to create child sexual abuse material from the photo, NBC10 Philadelphia reported on 23 October 2026. Officials cited by NBC10 say his devices held hundreds of AI-generated child sexual abuse videos and photos, other child sexual abuse material and more than 150 covert upskirt videos of women and teenage girls. The criminal complaint, as reported by the Delaware County Daily Times on 27 October, says the park photos were taken on 8 June 2026, that a matching AI video was created on 10 June, that records police obtained from Grok by warrant held the account's text prompts, and that investigators found 76 AI-generated videos and 53 AI images, fewer than the hundreds of files NBC10 relayed. The investigation began in June 2026 after a woman reported seeing such material on his phone; he was arrested on 21 October, posted bail and faces a preliminary hearing on 30 October. The charges are unproven.

Medium Grok

UK: Grok made sexualised images of a Welsh presenter and a broadcaster at users' requests; police closed both cases, then reopened the presenter's, TBIJ reports

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) and The Observer reported on 29 September 2026 that police investigations into sexualised images generated by X's chatbot Grok had failed to identify anyone. A Welsh presenter and campaigner against deepfake abuse, who had criticised Grok publicly on New Year's Eve 2025, saw an anonymous X user ask '@grok' to put her in a bikini made of cling film; Grok generated the image from her profile photo and posted it. She reported it to South Wales Police on 2 January 2026, was not asked for a statement until March, and was told officers had not heard back from X; the case was closed in May with the force saying no suspect could be identified. The same account also targeted a commentator and broadcaster, who estimates about 300 Grok images and videos of her were posted during the wave, including one alongside Jeffrey Epstein reported to the Metropolitan Police, which likewise said no suspect could be identified. The presenter entered pre-action legal correspondence with xAI (part of SpaceXAI) alleging misuse of private information and breaches of data-protection law and the Equality Act. On 22 October 2026 TBIJ reported that South Wales Police had reopened her case after she filed a formal complaint in September and TBIJ gave officers new information about the requesting user, including a crypto wallet and dozens of deleted posts; the force said it was now investigating the offence under the sexual-offences legislation aimed at deepfakes, rather than malicious-communications law, including enquiries with X. TBIJ added that other users had edited images of her with the standalone Grok app and that she is starting civil legal action against the company. BBC Wales had reported in January 2026 that explicit images of the presenter were created with the chatbot and shared without her consent.

If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.

Back to all incidents