{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-06T08:31:09.221Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"consent","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"contextual","evidence":"","year":"","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":4,"coverage":{"cases":4,"countries":1,"languages":1,"unknownLocation":2,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":1,"regulatory":0,"minors":0,"coreRelations":0,"contextualRelations":4,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":0,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":0},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2026-patient-reports-chatgpt-recording-at-clinic-without-consent","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"recording","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Original post’s first paragraph: the question about AI notes, the objection and the description of ChatGPT already recording.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The patient reports that the nurse’s phone showed ChatGPT already recording when the patient declined AI note-taking.","causal_attribution":"The recording and product identification are the patient’s account. No device evidence or independent confirmation was inspected."},{"id":"objection","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Original post’s final sentence describing lack of notice and the nurse’s response.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The patient says there had been no notice of the recording and the nurse dismissed their objection.","causal_attribution":"The described adverse experience is loss of control over recording and consent; no legal finding or onward data transfer is inferred."},{"id":"clarification","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Author reply pdhsn3l describing the phone on the counter with Chrome open to ChatGPT.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"Author reply pdhtd2k, opening and final sentences about already recording and insisting it be disabled.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"In replies to the same thread, the patient says the phone displayed ChatGPT in Chrome and that recording had already begun when the nurse entered, before asking consent.","causal_attribution":"The same author adds these observations. Their illustrative introduction with name/reason placeholders is not treated as an actual consultation transcript. Server transmission and later handling remain unknown."}],"effects":[{"label":"The patient reports that the nurse’s phone showed ChatGPT already recording when the patient declined AI note-taking.","claim_id":"recording","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.reddit.com/r/antiai/comments/1ww4yn4/today_i_was_radicalized/","kind":"forum_post","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Original English post body read directly and through its Arctic Shift capture. The archive gives created_utc 1790974521 (2 October 2026, 20:55 UTC). The author says the appointment was today; timezone is unknown, so only October is recorded for the event. Replies by the same author remain one reporting chain.","independence_group":"reddit-original-patient-account"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.reddit.com/r/antiai/comments/1ww4yn4/comment/pdhsn3l/","kind":"forum_comment","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Original English author reply inspected in the Arctic Shift thread capture. The reply author matches the original poster. It adds detail, not independent corroboration.","independence_group":"reddit-original-patient-account"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.reddit.com/r/antiai/comments/1ww4yn4/comment/pdhtd2k/","kind":"forum_comment","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Original English author reply inspected in the Arctic Shift thread capture. The reply author matches the original poster. It adds detail, not independent corroboration.","independence_group":"reddit-original-patient-account"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["health","privacy"],"unknowns":["Exact local event day and clinic location; the archived post timestamp is 2 October 2026 UTC.","Independent confirmation of the account and the clinic’s response.","What information was captured, the recording duration and whether it was deleted.","Whether information was transmitted, retained or used for training.","The software configuration, account type and any legal finding."],"geography":{"basis":"The original account gives no event location. References to a privacy law and the language do not establish a country.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Reviewed first-person account of an actual recording reportedly occurring in an identified AI service before consent. Published with attribution and explicit limits under the approved input-privacy boundary; no independent corroboration or finding of illegality is claimed.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-06"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The patient identifies ChatGPT as already recording at the appointment when they objected to AI note-taking. Under the approved input-privacy boundary, the reported capture itself supplies the relation and consent harm. This does not establish transmission to a server, retention, training, specific captured content, the account type or illegality. The author’s own replies specify that the phone displayed ChatGPT in Chrome and recording had already begun when the nurse entered, before consent was requested.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["received_personal_information"]},"name":"Patient reports a nurse was already recording with ChatGPT when they declined AI notes","summary":"In a public Reddit account, a patient says a nurse asked whether AI could take notes at a medical appointment. After the patient objected, the nurse picked up a phone that the patient described as showing ChatGPT already recording. The patient describes the recording as occurring without prior notice and says their objection was dismissed. In replies, the author says the phone had Chrome open to ChatGPT and recording had started when the nurse entered the room, before asking consent. This is an uncorroborated first-person account. It does not establish what was captured, whether anything was sent to a server, retained or used for training, or whether a law was broken. The clinic’s location, account type and response are unknown.","incidentDate":"2026-10-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-10-02","aiSystem":"ChatGPT on a nurse’s phone, identified by the patient in a public first-person account as already recording at a medical appointment.","aiProduct":"ChatGPT (reported)","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["loss_of_autonomy"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The patient reports loss of control over recording of their medical appointment: the phone was allegedly already recording before consent, and their objection was dismissed. No server disclosure or clinical harm is established.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One patient reports their own consent and privacy experience. No other patients, staff or commenters are counted.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.reddit.com/r/antiai/comments/1ww4yn4/today_i_was_radicalized/","primarySourceLabel":"Reddit, 2 October 2026: patient’s account of recording at a medical appointment","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-06T04:48:59.923465+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-06T04:48:59.923465+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["privacy","consent","clinical-notes","first-person-account"]},{"id":"2024-us-otter-notetaker-recorded-non-users-meetings-privacy-suit","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'participated in a Zoom meeting in California on February'; '24, 2025, where the Otter Notetaker was used by a meeting participant to transcribe the'; 'participated in a Zoom meeting in California in March 2025'; 'used Zoom to communicate with a medical professional, and'; 'Illinois on January 10, 2025 and May 19, 2025 where the Otter Notetaker was used to'; 'participated in a Zoom meeting in Washington state in March'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Plaintiffs are seven individuals from California, Illinois, and Washington state who'; 'participated in virtual meetings where the Otter Notetaker was allegedly used without their'; 'consent to record, transcribe, and store the contents of their communications.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Otter lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the'; 'allegations concerning the named Plaintiff’s personal knowledge, experiences, expectations, or'","relation":"contradicts","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"'who alleges his privacy was \"severely invaded\" upon realizing Otter was secretly recording a confidential conversation.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"Seven people who were not Otter account holders allege that, on Zoom or Microsoft Teams calls (six give dates between March 2024 and May 2025), another participant used Otter Notetaker and Otter recorded, transcribed and stored their conversations without their consent; the calls include one with a medical professional and meetings with a financial professional.","causal_attribution":"The plaintiffs attribute the recording to Otter's product design, which they say lets the notetaker record without every participant's consent; Otter denies the allegations."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'other personal information for its own commercial use, including to train its automatic speech'; 'The Illinois Plaintiffs allege that, during their virtual meetings, Otter'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Otter claims that before the audio of meetings is fed into its machine learning systems to help improve an AI speech recognition feature, it is \"de-identified,\"'","relation":"context","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"The plaintiffs allege that Otter keeps their conversational data on its servers and uses it to train its speech-recognition and machine-learning models, and that it captured the Illinois plaintiffs' voiceprints; Otter's policy, as reported by NPR, says it trains on transcripts with users' permission and de-identifies audio.","causal_attribution":"Alleged by the plaintiffs; Otter denies the allegations."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'felt frustrated, embarrassed, and stressed to learn that his'; 'conversation was recorded without his consent, and his information, voice, and'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"One California plaintiff alleges that he felt frustrated, embarrassed and stressed to learn that his conversation had been recorded without his consent.","causal_attribution":"Alleged by the plaintiffs as a consequence of Otter's recording."},{"id":"c4","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Accordingly, the motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims for lack of standing is denied.'; 'Accordingly, the motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ ECPA claim is denied.'; 'Accordingly, the motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ BIPA claims for lack of standing is denied.'; 'The motion to dismiss is GRANTED with leave to amend as to Count 2'; 'The motion is DENIED in all other respects.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"On 13 August 2026 the court denied Otter's motion to dismiss for lack of standing, holding that the alleged interception and retention of private conversations was a concrete injury, let the federal wiretap, California eavesdropping and Illinois biometric claims proceed, and dismissed some other claims.","causal_attribution":"Procedural ruling on the pleadings; no finding that Otter recorded anyone unlawfully."}],"effects":[{"label":"the plaintiffs say Otter's notetaker recorded, transcribed and stored their conversations on calls they joined, without their consent, including a medical call and calls with a financial professional","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"the plaintiffs say their conversations stay on Otter's servers for training its models and that it captured voiceprints of the Illinois plaintiffs","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"},{"label":"one plaintiff says he felt frustrated, embarrassed and stressed to learn he had been recorded","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.35.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Consolidated Class Action Complaint, ECF 35, filed 5 December 2025; RECAP PDF (68 pages) read on 2026-09-29 (HTTP 200), plaintiffs' experience sections read in full. Plaintiffs' allegations, not findings.","independence_group":"plaintiffs-account"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.68.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Order Granting Motion to Dismiss in Part, ECF 68, 13 August 2026 (Judge Eumi K. Lee); RECAP PDF read in full on 2026-09-29. Rules on the pleadings and accepts the allegations as true for that purpose; it makes no finding of fact.","independence_group":"ndcal-court-record"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.80.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Otter.ai's Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs' Consolidated Class Action Complaint, ECF 80, 17 September 2026; RECAP PDF read on 2026-09-29, plaintiff-experience paragraphs and responses read.","independence_group":"otter-answer"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.1.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Brewer v. Otter.ai, Inc., original Class Action Complaint, ECF 1, filed 15 August 2025; RECAP PDF read on 2026-09-29.","independence_group":"plaintiffs-account"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://www.npr.org/2025/08/15/g-s1-83087/otter-ai-transcription-class-action-lawsuit","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"NPR, 15 August 2025, read live on 2026-09-29 (HTTP 200). Reports the original complaint and summarises Otter's privacy policy; says neither side responded to requests for comment.","independence_group":"plaintiffs-account"},{"id":"s6","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.79.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Amended Case Management and Scheduling Order, ECF 79, 16 September 2026; read on 2026-09-29. Procedural facts only.","independence_group":"ndcal-court-record"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["privacy","work","health","finance"],"unknowns":["Whether Otter's product notified the plaintiffs on their calls that the notetaker was present, and what the other participants' Otter settings were.","Whether the plaintiffs' conversations were in fact used to train Otter's models, and in what form.","The exact date of one Illinois plaintiff's meetings, which the complaint places only within the limitations period."],"geography":{"basis":"The consolidated complaint places the plaintiffs' calls in California, in Chicago and elsewhere in Illinois, and in Washington state; the order describes the plaintiffs as individuals from California, Illinois and Washington state. The case is in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a bounded series of concrete privacy harms reported by identified people in a pending federal suit: each named plaintiff describes a call on which another participant's AI notetaker recorded and transcribed them without consent. The account rests on the plaintiffs' pleadings and the court's ruling on them; Otter denies the allegations. Plaintiff names are omitted.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-29"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Each plaintiff alleges that the Otter Notetaker, an AI transcription assistant, was used on their call and recorded and transcribed it; the relation recorded is that the AI produced speaker-attributed transcripts and, the complaint alleges, voiceprints identifying each speaker, a record of who said what (ECF 35 paras 10-11). Otter admits it offers an AI meeting assistant called Otter Notetaker but says it lacks knowledge of the plaintiffs' calls and denies the allegations.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"United States: seven people who say they did not hold Otter accounts say Otter's AI Notetaker recorded and transcribed their Zoom and Teams meetings without their consent, including a medical call and calls with a financial professional, and kept the data to train its models; a federal court let their core privacy claims proceed","summary":"Seven people in California, Illinois and Washington state are suing Otter.ai in a consolidated class action in the Northern District of California. Each says another meeting participant used Otter's AI Notetaker on a Zoom or Microsoft Teams call they joined, and that Otter recorded, transcribed and stored their conversation without their consent; six of them date their calls between March 2024 and May 2025. They say they were not Otter account holders. The calls they describe include a medical consultation, meetings with a financial professional and work discussions. They allege that Otter keeps the recordings and uses them to train its speech-recognition models, that it captured voiceprints of the Illinois plaintiffs, and one of them says learning of the recording left him frustrated, embarrassed and stressed. On 13 August 2026 the court found that the alleged interception of private conversations was a concrete injury and let the federal wiretap, California eavesdropping and Illinois biometric claims proceed, while dismissing some claims. Otter's answer to the consolidated complaint, filed on 17 September 2026, says it lacks knowledge of the plaintiffs' experiences and denies the allegations.","incidentDate":"2024-03-01","incidentEndDate":"2025-05-19","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2025-08-15","aiSystem":"Otter Notetaker, Otter.ai's AI meeting assistant, joined to Zoom and Microsoft Teams calls by another participant's Otter account","aiProduct":"Otter Notetaker","aiCompany":"Otter.ai, Inc.","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["other_material_harm","psychological_distress"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The plaintiffs allege that Otter recorded, transcribed and kept their private conversations on calls they joined without their consent, including medical and financial discussions, used them to train its models and took voiceprints, and one plaintiff says learning this left him frustrated, embarrassed and stressed (plaintiffs' allegations in a pending suit; Otter denies them).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":7,"affectedCountStatus":"documented_minimum","affectedCountEvidence":"The court order says 'Plaintiffs are seven individuals from California, Illinois, and Washington state' who participated in meetings where the Otter Notetaker was allegedly used without their consent; each describes their own call in the consolidated complaint. They were not Otter account holders (one says only that to her knowledge she did not create an account), so they are counted as other people. The proposed class members are not counted. Documented minimum 7.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US","platformType":"assistant","outcomeType":"lawsuit_ongoing","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.68.0.pdf","primarySourceLabel":"Order granting motion to dismiss in part, In re Otter.AI Privacy Litigation, No. 5:25-cv-06911-EKL (N.D. Cal.), 13 August 2026","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T09:04:08.493618+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:16:54.438217+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["otter-ai","ai-notetaker","meeting-transcription","privacy","wiretap","bipa","voiceprint","training-data","class-action","non-user"]},{"id":"2026-abc-ai-medical-scribe-false-drug-use-record","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'she was asked whether she consented to having the appointment transcribed by artificial intelligence (AI)'; 'with the AI scribe making up the serious but false claim that'; 'it made up that I take [psychedelic] mushrooms. I have never done mushrooms in my life'; 'only picked up the mistake after her kidney stone surgery in March, when she read the post-operative letter her specialist sent to her GP'; 'micro-dosed mushrooms and that could be the reason for prior bleeding around the kidneys'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The patient consented to AI transcription of her first urology appointment; after her March 2026 kidney-stone surgery she found that the post-operative letter to her GP stated she micro-dosed mushrooms and that this could explain earlier bleeding around the kidneys, a claim she says is false.","causal_attribution":"Patient's account to ABC; the attribution of the false entry to the AI scribe is hers and ABC's framing."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'I was gobsmacked and in tears'; 'was particularly stressed as she was receiving workers' compensation and felt any mention of illegal drugs on her medical record could impact her case'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"She reported distress and feared the entry could affect her workers' compensation case.","causal_attribution":"Patient's account."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'the urologist sent a letter apologising'; 'Please be assured that we take the accuracy of our documentation very seriously, and we are truly sorry that this occurred'; 'it appeared to be from an error during the \"dictation or transcription process\"'; 'The urologist corrected the correspondence and in her letter said she would review how AI was used in her practice'; 'The doctor did not provide any responses to the ABC's questions about what changes, if any, have been made since'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"After her complaint the urologist apologised in writing, said the cause could not be determined but appeared to be an error in the dictation or transcription process, corrected the correspondence and said she would review her use of AI; she did not answer ABC's questions about changes made.","causal_attribution":"Doctor's letter as quoted by ABC; the doctor does not confirm the scribe as the origin."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'AHPRA, said clinicians must always check all output from an AI scribe for accuracy to ensure they meet their professional obligations'; 'said it was clear her doctor did not do this'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"AHPRA told ABC that clinicians must always check all output from an AI scribe for accuracy; the patient said it was clear her doctor had not.","causal_attribution":"Regulator comment and patient's view; context for the case."}],"effects":[{"label":"a false claim of psychedelic-mushroom use entered the patient's medical record and reached her GP; distress and fear for her workers' compensation case","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"the correspondence was corrected and the doctor apologised after the patient complained","claim_id":"c3","direction":"positive"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-14/ai-medical-scribe-error-leaves-patient-devastated/107031672","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read live in English on 2026-09-20 (HTTP 200; saved body 402,866 bytes). Feature by the ABC Specialist Reporting Team based on the patient's interview and the letters she received, plus regulator and peak-body comment.","independence_group":"abc-news-2026-08-14"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["health"],"unknowns":["The AI scribe product and vendor are not named.","The location of the clinic and the patient's residence are not stated.","The date of the appointment at which the transcription was made is not stated. The report gives the surgery as 'in March' without a year; 2026 is taken from the 14 August 2026 publication date.","Whether the false claim originated in the scribe's output or in a later dictation or editing step is not established; the doctor's letter says the cause could not be determined.","What changes the practice made afterwards are not reported."],"geography":{"basis":"No inspected source states where the appointment or the patient is located. The ABC report frames the case within Australian regulation (AHPRA, RACGP, TGA) and quotes Australian bodies, but does not locate the patient or the clinic, so the event and affected-person countries are left unknown rather than inferred from the publisher. No court proceeding.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as an everyday-assistance and health case in which an AI system made a false claim about a person in her medical record, with reported distress and a corrected record. Single ABC News report read in full; claims recorded as reported and attributed to the patient and the doctor's letter. The patient is named in the report but not in this record; the doctor and clinic are unnamed.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-20"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The patient told ABC that the appointment was transcribed by an AI scribe with her consent and that the false mushroom claim appeared in the resulting post-operative letter; the doctor's apology attributes the claim to an error during the 'dictation or transcription process' without confirming the scribe as the origin. The product is not named. Single ABC report.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"Reported by ABC News (Australia): an AI scribe used at a urology appointment inserted a false claim that the patient took psychedelic mushrooms into her record; the error reached her GP in a post-operative letter and was corrected only after she complained","summary":"A patient who consented to having her first urology appointment transcribed by an artificial-intelligence scribe discovered, after her kidney-stone surgery in March 2026, that the post-operative letter her specialist sent to her GP stated she micro-dosed psychedelic mushrooms and that this could explain earlier bleeding around the kidneys. She says she has never taken mushrooms. She was receiving workers' compensation and feared that any mention of illegal drugs on her medical record could affect her case. After she complained, the urologist sent a letter of apology saying the practice takes documentation accuracy seriously, that she could not determine how the claim came to be included but that it appeared to be an error during the 'dictation or transcription process', that the correspondence had been corrected and that she would review how AI was used in her practice. The doctor did not answer ABC's questions about what changes had been made. Australia's practitioner regulator AHPRA told ABC that clinicians must check all AI-scribe output; the patient says it was clear her doctor had not. The account is a single ABC News report (14 August 2026) based on the patient's interview and the letters she received; the scribe product and the clinic's location are not named.","incidentDate":"2026-03-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-08-14","aiSystem":"AI medical scribe (product not named in the report)","aiProduct":"Unidentified AI medical scribe","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["psychological_distress","reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The patient reports distress ('gobsmacked and in tears') and fear for her workers' compensation case after a false illegal-drug claim entered her medical record and was sent to her GP; the record was corrected after her complaint. The false entry is attributed by the patient to the AI scribe and by the doctor to an error in the dictation or transcription process.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One patient whose record carried the false claim (ABC report). The clinician used the AI tool, so the patient is counted as another person harmed rather than a participant user. Exact 1.","victimAgeRange":"adult","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"internal_action","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-14/ai-medical-scribe-error-leaves-patient-devastated/107031672","primarySourceLabel":"ABC News (Specialist Reporting Team), 14 August 2026: Error by AI scribe during medical appointment leaves patient devastated","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-20T03:28:12.119063+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:22.846812+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["ai-scribe","medical-records","health","transcription-error","false-record","workers-compensation","abc-news"]},{"id":"2025-washington-il-snapchat-flag-student-teacher-arrest","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'The social media site flagged the message and warned the FBI, which then notified the Sheriff's Office'; 'the office had been informed on Jan. 29, 2025, at 1:06 p.m. that the FBI had received a threat via Snapchat involving someone at John A. Hensey School in Washington.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"District email: 'The use of that obviously inappropriate language on the social media site triggered a report to law enforcement who subsequently interviewed the student teacher.'","relation":"context","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Snapchat's systems flagged the woman's private group-chat message and warned the FBI, which notified the Tazewell County Sheriff's Office on 29 January 2025 at 1:06 p.m.","causal_attribution":"One outlet group (Peoria Journal Star) carrying two distinct records (sheriff's reports via FOIA; the district's email). The flagging technology is unspecified; no second independent outlet describes the mechanism, so the claim stays reported."},{"id":"c2","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"'In a chat with her boyfriend and her two roommates, she advised whether she should \"shoot the child or just the whole school?\"' (sheriff's reports).","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Volpe sent the message to her friends, asking them whether she should \"shoot\" the student.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The flagged message asked whether she should 'shoot the child or just the whole school' (sheriff's reports' rendering); the district's email and 25News Now report her asking friends whether she should 'shoot' the student.","causal_attribution":"Wordings differ slightly between the sheriff's reports and the district/25News accounts; both versions are attributed. She confirmed sending the message and said it was a joke."},{"id":"c3","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"Body-cam account: interview in an empty classroom, Miranda rights, the flagged message shown, consent forms, classroom search finding nothing; 'she would be arrested in Tazewell County'.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'deputies arrested [her] at John L. Hensey Elementary School around 1 p.m. Wednesday. She was booked into the Tazewell County Jail for disorderly conduct.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Deputies interviewed her at the school, read her Miranda rights, searched her phone and belongings with consent and found no weapons; they arrested her on a disorderly conduct charge and she was booked into the Tazewell County Jail.","causal_attribution":"The arrest and booking are established by two independent local outlets; the interview detail comes from the FOIA body-cam footage and police reports."},{"id":"c4","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"'Deputies interviewed her and came to the conclusion that she made the comment out of \"exasperation,\" had no intentions to harm anyone, and was not a threat to the school.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"District email: 'Law enforcement officers quickly determined that the student teacher made the statement out of exasperation... but did not have any actual intent to shoot anyone or otherwise cause harm.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The Sheriff's Office and the district concluded the remark was made out of exasperation, with no intent to harm and no threat to the school.","causal_attribution":"Both the district's letter and the deputies' own conclusion are attributed; no source reports any contrary finding."},{"id":"c5","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"'it said the student teacher would not be returning to District 50 to complete her assignment.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"Superintendent Chad Allaman's letter: 'Volpe is not returning to the school to finish her educational assignment.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The district told parents she would not return to District 50 to complete her educational assignment.","causal_attribution":"The district's decision is attributed to its own letter carried by two outlets."}],"effects":[{"label":"arrest and loss of a teaching placement after an automated flag escalated a private joke to law enforcement","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.pjstar.com/story/news/local/2026/04/10/how-an-fbi-tip-led-to-arrest-of-a-student-teacher-in-washington-illinois/88217675007/","kind":"news_report_foia_records","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-09-15 (datePublished 2026-04-10T11:15Z; 34 paragraphs). Based on sheriff's deputy and detective reports plus body-camera footage obtained by FOIA from the Tazewell County Sheriff's Office.","independence_group":"pjstar"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.pjstar.com/story/news/education/2025/01/30/washington-il-student-teacher-makes-inappropriate-shooting-comment-district-says/78061557007/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-09-15 (datePublished 2025-01-30T23:13Z). Based on the District 50 email to parents; withheld the teacher's name.","independence_group":"pjstar"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.25newsnow.com/2025/01/31/exasperated-student-teacher-wont-return-after-allegedly-commenting-about-shooting-student/","kind":"local_tv_news","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-09-15 (datePublished 2025-01-31T17:07Z). Attributes to deputies and the school district; names the teacher from jail records — the name is deliberately not carried into this public record.","independence_group":"week-25news"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://thoughtcatalog.com/jeremy-london/2026/08/snapchat-scans-your-private-group-chats-and-a-22-year-old-teacher-found-out-when-deputies-showed-up-to-arrest-her-over-a-joke/","kind":"content_farm_rehash","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read on 2026-09-15 (datePublished 2026-08-02). Two substantive paragraphs, 'reportedly' framing, no place, date or document; derivative of the 2025 local reporting with embellishments. Recorded for provenance; never cited as support.","independence_group":"thought-catalog"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["education","work","justice","privacy"],"unknowns":["The disposition of the disorderly conduct charge (dismissal, plea, supervision) is not reported in the inspected sources.","The flagging technology Snapchat used (automated classifiers, hash matching or otherwise) is not specified in the inspected records.","Whether she continued teacher training elsewhere is not reported.","The school's name appears as 'John A. Hensey School' (Peoria Journal Star) and 'John L. Hensey Elementary School' (25News Now); the discrepancy is unresolved.","The exact interval between sending the message and the FBI referral is not stated; content-farm claims of 'within an hour' are unverified."],"geography":{"basis":"Event: John A. Hensey School, Washington, Illinois (25News Now renders the school name 'John L. Hensey Elementary School'), and the Tazewell County Jail. Affected person: the student teacher at that school. No court proceeding is reported, so court_countries is [].","court_countries":[],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as an institutional-use automated-moderation case: a consequential institutional response (arrest, placement loss) to an automated flag of a private message, documented by FOIA-based local reporting. She is an adult; although local TV named her from jail records, she is not named here because deputies cleared her of intent and republication adds reputational risk without evidential value.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-15"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Police reports obtained under FOIA state 'the social media site flagged the message and warned the FBI', and the district's email says the language use 'triggered a report to law enforcement'; no human reporter was involved. The flagging technology (automated classifiers or otherwise) is not specified in the inspected records.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["made_decision_about","made_claim_about"]},"name":"Washington, Illinois: Snapchat flagged a student teacher's private joke to the FBI; she was arrested at her school and lost her placement","summary":"On 29 January 2025, a 22-year-old student teacher at a District 50 elementary school in Washington, Illinois, vented in a private Snapchat group chat with her boyfriend and two roommates after a third-grade student turned off her computer mid lesson-plan, asking whether she should 'shoot the child or just the whole school' (per sheriff's reports). Snapchat's systems flagged the message and warned the FBI, which notified the Tazewell County Sheriff's Office at 1:06 p.m. Deputies interviewed her at the school, confirmed she sent it as a joke, searched her phone and belongings with her consent and found no weapons, and arrested her on a disorderly conduct charge; they concluded she had spoken out of 'exasperation' with no intent to harm and no threat to the school. The district told parents she would not return to complete her educational assignment.","incidentDate":"2025-01-29","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2025-01-30","aiSystem":"Snapchat automated content-flagging system","aiProduct":"Snapchat content-flagging system","aiCompany":"Snap Inc.","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["legal_harm","professional_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"A private joke flagged by an automated system led to an armed-response interview at her workplace, arrest and jail booking on a disorderly conduct charge, and the loss of her student-teaching placement, although deputies and the district concluded she never intended harm.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One documented harmed person: the student teacher, subject to the platform's institutional automated flagging (counted under institutional use, not as an AI user). No student or staff member was aware of the conversation per the district; the referenced third-grade student is not counted as harmed (deputies found no threat and no one else saw the private message).","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"criminal_charges","outcomeStatus":"unknown","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.pjstar.com/story/news/local/2026/04/10/how-an-fbi-tip-led-to-arrest-of-a-student-teacher-in-washington-illinois/88217675007/","primarySourceLabel":"Peoria Journal Star (10 Apr 2026) — FOIA-based account: sheriff's reports and body-camera footage","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-15T05:24:48.263548+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:21.046347+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["privacy","automated-moderation","snapchat","education","arrest","institutional-use","illinois"]}]}