{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-09-30T06:27:46.412Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"england","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"","evidence":"","year":"unknown","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":4,"coverage":{"cases":4,"countries":1,"languages":2,"unknownLocation":2,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":4,"lawsuits":0,"regulatory":0,"minors":0,"coreRelations":1,"contextualRelations":1,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":2,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":2},"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-lewes-rape-trial-stayed-complainant-ai-cross-examination-prep","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'The download revealed two documents which contained a summary record of what C had recalled of events on the night in question, followed by a series of questions in the form of a cross-examination of C’s account, together with suggested answers.'; 'C was asked who they had been communicating with, to which C responded: \"I had put stuff into AI to help me prepare myself for the court\".'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'There then follows several pages of text containing the promised summary, together with 24 highly pertinent questions and suggested answers'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"A download of the complainant's phone during the Lewes trial revealed two documents containing a summary of the complainant's recollection of the night in question and a series of cross-examination questions with suggested answers, and the complainant said 'I had put stuff into AI to help me prepare myself for the court'.","causal_attribution":"Established by the judgment's account of the trial record."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'this appeal has proceeded on the basis that the documents were generated by AI in response to prompts from C. We do not know the nature of those prompts.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Although the defence did not accept that the documented questions and answers were generated by AI, as opposed to being contained in a communication from a real person'","relation":"context","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Please make sure someone is with you or available to you today.'","relation":"context","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The documents were generated by AI in response to the complainant's prompts.","causal_attribution":"The complainant's statement, accepted as the working basis of the appeal; the defence did not accept it and the court made no finding on the product or prompts."},{"id":"c3","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'It is a prosecution appeal against the Recorder’s ruling, part-way through trial, staying proceedings as an abuse. Upon the prosecution giving notice of its intention to appeal, accompanied by the usual prosecution undertaking, the jury was discharged.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'this is evidence of coaching, whether or not done by AI or someone else.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'The ruling stayed proceedings after the complainant was found to have used AI to help prepare for court.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The Recorder held that the documents amounted to witness coaching, that the defendant could not have a fair trial, and stayed the proceedings as an abuse of process part-way through the trial; the jury was discharged when the prosecution gave notice of appeal.","causal_attribution":"The judgment records that the stay was granted because of the documents the complainant attributed to AI."},{"id":"c4","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Date: Thursday 4th June 2026'; 'Accordingly, we give leave, we allow the appeal and reverse the ruling below.'; 'As the allegations are now of some age, the re-trial should be listed at the earliest opportunity.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Hay’s decision has been reversed, and a retrial has been ordered for listing “at the earliest opportunity,” per the Gazette.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"On 4 June 2026 the Court of Appeal reversed the stay, holding that the trial process could deal with any prejudice, and directed that the retrial be listed at the earliest opportunity because the allegations were now of some age.","causal_attribution":"Established by the judgment."},{"id":"c5","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'All witnesses, whether for the prosecution or defence, should be firmly discouraged from resorting to the use of AI to prepare for giving evidence.'; 'their use of AI may open up further lines of enquiry, exposing their online activity to an unwelcome, wider-ranging and potentially more intrusive investigation and examination for the purposes of disclosure'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The Court of Appeal said witnesses should be firmly discouraged from using AI to prepare their evidence, and that for sexual-offence complainants such use may expose their online activity to wider and potentially more intrusive investigation.","causal_attribution":"General guidance in the judgment; it does not describe a further consequence to this complainant."}],"effects":[{"label":"the trial was stayed part-way through as an abuse of process and the jury discharged after the complainant's AI-prepared cross-examination documents were treated as witness coaching","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"},{"label":"a retrial of allegations described as now of some age was required after the stay was reversed","claim_id":"c4","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/crim/2026/918","kind":"court_record","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Full judgment text read by curl on 2026-09-29 from the National Archives Find Case Law service. The court excluded identifying detail and anonymised both parties.","independence_group":"fgd-judgment"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/court-of-appeal-calls-for-ai-regulation-in-criminal-proceedings-after-trial-collapses/5127513.article","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Law Society Gazette report of 28 July 2026 (Bianca Castro), read by curl on 2026-09-29. It reports the judgment and is grouped with it.","independence_group":"fgd-judgment"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/news/international/uk-trial-halts-over-witness-ai-use-court-of-appeal-judges-flag-regulation-concerns/394434","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Canadian Lawyer, read by curl on 2026-09-29; attributes its account to the Law Society Gazette.","independence_group":"fgd-judgment"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use"],"contexts":["justice"],"unknowns":["When the trial and the Recorder's stay took place (before the 4 June 2026 appeal hearing).","Which AI product was used and what the complainant's prompts were.","Whether the retrial has taken place and its outcome.","The complainant's own account of the effect of the stay; no statement from the complainant was read."],"geography":{"basis":"The trial took place at Lewes Crown Court and the appeal at the Royal Courts of Justice in London (judgment). Where the complainant lives, and where the AI was used, is not stated.","court_countries":["GB"],"event_countries":["GB"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published from the Court of Appeal judgment as a concrete adverse consequence of a person's AI use: the complainant's trial was stayed and must be retried. The judgment and all press coverage are one reporting chain. The complainant and defendant are anonymous by law and no identifying detail is recorded; the complainant's pronouns follow the judgment's neutral usage.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-29"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The complainant told the court the material came from putting things into AI, and the Court of Appeal proceeded on the basis that the documents were AI-generated in response to the complainant's prompts. The defence did not accept that they were AI-generated rather than written by a real person, and the product and prompts are unknown.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with"]},"name":"Lewes Crown Court, England: a rape trial was stayed part-way through and the jury discharged after documents on the complainant's phone, which the complainant said came from putting material into AI to prepare for court, were treated as witness coaching; the Court of Appeal reversed the stay on 4 June 2026 and ordered a retrial","summary":"During a rape trial at Lewes Crown Court, a download of the complainant's phone revealed two documents containing a summary of the complainant's recollection of the night in question and 24 questions in the form of a cross-examination, with suggested answers. Asked about them, the complainant said: 'I had put stuff into AI to help me prepare myself for the court'. The trial judge (a Recorder) held that this was witness coaching, found that the defendant could not have a fair trial and stayed the proceedings as an abuse of process; the jury was discharged when the prosecution gave notice of appeal. On 4 June 2026 the Court of Appeal (R v FGD [2026] EWCA Crim 918) reversed the stay, holding that the trial process could deal with any prejudice, and directed a retrial at the earliest opportunity because the allegations were 'now of some age'. The defence did not accept that the documents were AI-generated; the appeal proceeded on that basis. The court warned that witnesses should be firmly discouraged from using AI to prepare their evidence and that, for complainants in sexual-offence cases, doing so may expose their online activity to wider and more intrusive investigation.","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"unknown","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-07-28","aiSystem":"An unidentified AI chatbot; the complainant told the court 'I had put stuff into AI to help me prepare myself for the court'. The judgment does not name the product and says the court does not know the prompts used.","aiProduct":"Unidentified chatbot","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["legal_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The complainant's rape trial was stayed part-way through and the jury discharged because documents the complainant said came from AI preparation were treated as witness coaching; the Court of Appeal reversed the stay and ordered a retrial of allegations it described as 'now of some age' (R v FGD [2026] EWCA Crim 918).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: the complainant, whose trial was stayed and must be retried (judgment). The defendant is not counted; the stay was in the defendant's favour and no harm to the defendant from the AI use is reported. Exact 1.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","jurisdiction":"GB","platformType":"chatbot","outcomeType":"media_coverage","outcomeStatus":"pending","primarySourceUrl":"https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/crim/2026/918","primarySourceLabel":"R v FGD [2026] EWCA Crim 918, Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), judgment of 4 June 2026","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T09:00:29.036322+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:44.047133+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["witness-coaching","criminal-trial","court-of-appeal","lewes-crown-court","england","sexual-offence-complainant","trial-stayed","communicated-with"]},{"id":"2026-argentina-jorge-martinez-ai-messi-milei-video-investment-scam","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'La primera estafa comenzó cuando Martínez se interesó por una supuesta plataforma de inversión que utilizaba videos falsos de Lionel Messi y Javier Milei, creados con Inteligencia Artificial, como parte de una estrategia para atraer a posibles víctimas.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'La primera estafa comenzó en una plataforma digital que usaba videos falsos de Lionel Messi y Javier Milei creados con Inteligencia Artificial para captar víctimas.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Fue estafado por una plataforma promocionada con IA en la que utilizaban un video de Messi y otro de Milei para captar gente'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The 79-year-old actor Jorge Martínez was drawn into a supposed investment platform that used AI-generated fake videos of Lionel Messi and Javier Milei, and transferred money to it.","causal_attribution":"La Criti's post and both outlets say the platform used AI-made videos of Messi and Milei to attract people; none says whether he saw them or that they drew him in, and his quoted words do not mention the videos or AI."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'“Cuando llegaron a los $19.300 de intereses me preguntaron a dónde me los mandaban y les dije que a mi cuenta. Les di mi cuenta, como un bol…, y cuando fui al banco a la tarde me habían dejado en cero mis cuatro cuentas”, relató Martínez.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"After two weeks of calls showing fictitious interest, the scammers asked for his bank details to pay out the gains, and his four bank accounts were emptied the same day.","causal_attribution":"His account; the amount lost in the first scam is not stated."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Me sacaron los 1400 dólares que había depositado en el banco'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Soon after, a separate scam by callers posing as Temu took the 1,400 dollars he had deposited; no AI element is reported in that second scam.","causal_attribution":"Recorded as context; the second scam is not attributed to AI."}],"effects":[{"label":"savings in four bank accounts emptied after an investment platform promoted with AI-made celebrity videos","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://laopinionaustral.com.ar/argentina/jorge-martinez-victima-de-una-doble-estafa-un-falso-messi-creado-con-ia-y-una-supuesta-bonificacion-de-temu-713028.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"es","translation_note":"Read live in Spanish on 2026-09-29 (La Opinión Austral, 28 September 2026). Relays the actor's account as told by journalist Nahuel Saa (La Criti). Researcher translation.","independence_group":"la-criti-account"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.pronto.com.ar/espectaculos/2026/9/28/jorge-martinez-victima-de-una-doble-estafa-le-vaciaron-las-cuentas-y-perdio-todos-sus-ahorros-264332.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"es","translation_note":"Read live in Spanish on 2026-09-29 (Pronto, 28 September 2026); same account and quotes. Researcher translation.","independence_group":"la-criti-account"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://x.com/LaCritiok/status/2104695128891756941","kind":"journalist_social_post","access":"read","language":"es","translation_note":"Post text read in Spanish on 2026-09-29 via api.fxtwitter.com (bodies/verify-ar-lacriti-x-2104695128891756941.json); the attached 99-second video of Martínez speaking was not transcribed. Researcher translation.","independence_group":"la-criti-account"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["finance","everyday_life"],"unknowns":["The amount lost in the first scam and when it happened.","Whether he filed a police complaint.","Which platform and videos were involved."],"geography":{"basis":"Martínez is presented by Argentine outlets as a telenovela actor and the amounts he describes are in pesos (La Opinión Austral; Pronto); no body states his residence. The scammers' phone numbers came from Spain and England per his account; the platform's location is unknown, so no event country is recorded.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":["AR"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as an adverse financial experience (an investment platform promoted with AI-made videos of Messi and Milei, on which he lost the savings in his four bank accounts); the AI system's relation to him is unknown. The account is his, relayed by the journalist La Criti and two Argentine outlets; he is a public figure. The AI element rests on that account.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-29"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Journalist Nahuel Saa (La Criti) posted on X on 28 September 2026 that Martínez was defrauded by a platform 'promocionada con IA' that used a video of Messi and another of Milei to attract people; La Opinión Austral and Pronto rewrite this as fake videos created with AI. Martínez's quoted words do not mention AI or the videos. The videos were not inspected and the AI claim is not independently verified. The AI depicted third parties; no AI relation to the actor himself is established, so the relation is unknown.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["unknown"]},"name":"Argentina: actor Jorge Martínez, 79, loses the savings in his four bank accounts to an investment platform promoted with AI-made fake videos of Lionel Messi and Javier Milei, then loses 1,400 dollars to a separate fake-Temu call","summary":"Journalist Nahuel Saa (La Criti) reported in September 2026 that the 79-year-old telenovela actor Jorge Martínez, who was saving a sum in dollars, had fallen for two consecutive online scams. In the first, he became interested in a supposed investment platform that used fake videos of Lionel Messi and Javier Milei created with artificial intelligence, transferred money, and received calls for about two weeks showing growing interest. When the callers asked where to send 19,300 pesos of 'interest', he gave his bank account, and that afternoon his four accounts had been emptied. He noted that the callers' numbers were from Spain and England. Soon after, callers posing as Temu promised him a 500,000-peso loyalty bonus, asked for his account, and took the 1,400 dollars he had deposited; no AI element is reported in that second scam.","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"unknown","exposurePattern":"repeated_interactions","reportedDate":"2026-09-28","aiSystem":"AI-generated fake videos of Lionel Messi and Javier Milei used to promote the investment platform (per the relayed account); the tool is not identified","aiProduct":"Unidentified video tool","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["financial_loss"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"An elderly actor lost the savings in his four bank accounts after being recruited by an investment platform promoted with AI-made celebrity videos (his account via La Criti, La Opinión Austral and Pronto).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person, Jorge Martínez (La Opinión Austral; Pronto). Exact 1.","victimAgeRange":"elderly","jurisdiction":"AR","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"media_coverage","outcomeStatus":"unknown","primarySourceUrl":"https://laopinionaustral.com.ar/argentina/jorge-martinez-victima-de-una-doble-estafa-un-falso-messi-creado-con-ia-y-una-supuesta-bonificacion-de-temu-713028.html","primarySourceLabel":"La Opinión Austral, 28 September 2026: Jorge Martínez, víctima de una doble estafa: un falso Messi creado con IA y una supuesta bonificación de Temu","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T03:22:15.951695+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:24.357832+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["deepfakes","investment-scam","celebrity-deepfake","messi","milei","elderly","argentina","financial-loss"]},{"id":"2026-england-gemini-meet-notetaker-kept-transcribing-prospects-after-host-left-first-person","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'My boss was in a meeting with a prospective client and his business partner'; 'Gemini Notetaker was on.'; 'my boss said goodbye and left the meeting, and the two business partners stayed on the call to discuss the proposal and the other agencies they were looking at.'; 'What they didn't know was that Gemini was still taking notes'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'it was on meet.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"During a Google Meet pitch with Gemini note-taking on, the agency's boss left at the end, the prospective client's two business partners stayed on the call to discuss the proposal and competing agencies, and Gemini kept taking notes of that discussion.","causal_attribution":"Poster's account; the poster does not say they attended the meeting and describes reading the conversation in the notes and transcript."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'My boss sent me the notes and transcript from the meeting to create a follow-up deck'; 'They named the other agency they were looking at and talked about personal details of who they spoke to specifically on the call.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The boss sent the poster the notes and transcript to build a follow-up deck from them; the partners had named a competing agency and talked about personal details of the people they had spoken to.","causal_attribution":"Poster's account of what they received and were asked to do."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'I assumed the notetaker stops when the person who activates them leaves'; 'I don't think they were aware because the things they spoke about were very in detail and slightly scathing towards my boss' proposal.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The poster believes the partners did not know they were still being transcribed; the poster says they had assumed the note-taker stops when the person who started it leaves.","causal_attribution":"The poster's inference from the content of the discussion; commenters disputed it, arguing Meet notifies all participants."},{"id":"c4","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Google Meet informs all meeting participants that notes are being taken and the pencil icon appears on all participants' screens.'; 'The meeting organizer and participants internal to the host’s organization can start or stop notes.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"Google's help page says Meet informs all participants when notes are being taken, shows a pencil icon on all participants' screens, and lets only the organizer and participants internal to the host's organization start or stop notes.","causal_attribution":"General product documentation; it does not establish what the partners saw in this meeting."}],"effects":[{"label":"two prospective clients' private discussion after the host left the call was transcribed and summarised without their apparent knowledge","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"the notes, including a named competing agency and personal details, were passed to agency staff to shape a follow-up pitch","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/1wsd4ul/my_boss_recorded_a_transcript_of_a_meeting/","kind":"forum_post","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-09-29: full self-text retrieved through the arctic_shift archive API by post ID. The poster handle is not recorded.","independence_group":"reddit-meet-notetaker-poster"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/1wsd4ul/my_boss_recorded_a_transcript_of_a_meeting/pckanew/","kind":"forum_comment","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"The poster's own reply in the thread (archive API, 2026-09-29); a near-identical second reply (pckasgw) adds 'it was on meet.'","independence_group":"reddit-meet-notetaker-poster"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/1wsd4ul/my_boss_recorded_a_transcript_of_a_meeting/pckasgw/","kind":"forum_comment","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"The poster's second reply, stating the call was on Google Meet (archive API, 2026-09-29).","independence_group":"reddit-meet-notetaker-poster"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://support.google.com/meet/answer/14754931?hl=en","kind":"company_documentation","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Google Meet Help page for \"Take notes for me\", fetched 2026-09-29 (200). Describes the feature in general; it does not address this meeting.","independence_group":"google-meet-help"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["work","privacy"],"unknowns":["Whether the partners saw or understood Meet's note-taking notice after the host left.","The date of the meeting and the partners' location.","Whether the follow-up deck was made or the prospective client learned of the transcript.","Where the call participants were located."],"geography":{"basis":"The poster titles the post '(England)', answering the subreddit's instruction to say whether the poster is in England, Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland; that locates the poster and the law they ask about, not the call. The post does not say where the boss or the prospective clients were during the Google Meet call. Unknown after review.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter's public-forum rule as a concrete first-person account of an AI note-taker capturing and summarising people who were not its users, with the notes then used commercially, described with attribution and without corroboration. Google's documentation of participant notification is included as context. No handle, company or client name is recorded.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-29"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The poster names Gemini note-taking in a Google Meet call as the tool that kept producing notes and a transcript after the host left; Google's help page documents the feature. No notes or screenshots were published.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"First-person forum account: an agency employee in England says Gemini note-taking in Google Meet kept transcribing two prospective clients after the agency's boss left the call, and that the boss passed their private post-meeting discussion to staff to shape a follow-up pitch","summary":"In a public post to r/LegalAdviceUK on 28 September 2026, an employee of a marketing agency in England writes that their boss pitched a prospective client and the client's business partner on a Google Meet call with Gemini note-taking switched on. After the boss said goodbye and left, the two business partners stayed on the call to discuss the proposal and the other agencies they were considering, and Gemini kept taking notes. The boss then sent the employee the notes and transcript, which named a competing agency and included 'personal details of who they spoke to specifically on the call', and asked for a follow-up deck built on what the partners liked and disliked. The poster believes the partners did not know they were still being transcribed. Google's help page says Meet tells all participants when notes are being taken; whether the partners noticed is not known. The account is uncorroborated.","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"unknown","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-09-28","aiSystem":"Gemini note-taking in Google Meet ('Gemini Notetaker' in the poster's words; Google's help page calls the feature \"Take notes for me\")","aiProduct":"Gemini note-taking in Google Meet","aiCompany":"Google","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["other_material_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"An agency employee reports that Gemini note-taking in Google Meet kept transcribing two prospective clients' private discussion after the agency's host left the call, and that the boss passed the notes, including a named competing agency and personal details, to staff to shape a follow-up pitch; the poster believes the partners were unaware (first-person account, uncorroborated).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":2,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"Two people: 'the two business partners' who stayed on the call and whose discussion was transcribed. They were not the users of the note-taker (the agency's boss was). The poster, who reports discomfort at being asked to use the notes, is not counted. Exact 2.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"GB","platformType":"assistant","outcomeStatus":"unknown","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/1wsd4ul/my_boss_recorded_a_transcript_of_a_meeting/","primarySourceLabel":"r/LegalAdviceUK, 28 September 2026: \"My boss recorded a transcript of a meeting without consent (England)\" (public first-person post)","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T03:21:48.445579+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:36.507533+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["first-person","reddit","gemini","google-meet","meeting-notetaker","transcription","privacy","work","made-claim-about"]},{"id":"2026-guildford-pensioner-deepfake-farage-investment-scam-40k","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'The seemingly AI generated clip showed the irate Reform leader challenging Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey in front of a fake'; 'A Surrey pensioner has revealed how he lost £40,000 to an investment scam that used a deepfake video of Nigel Farage.'; 'Viewers were then directed to a supposed news article that promised huge returns for minimal investments.'; 'This deepfake video of Nigel Farage and Andrew Bailey has been shown millions of times to social media users.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The scam used an apparently AI-generated deepfake video of Nigel Farage challenging Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey in front of a fake BBC Question Time backdrop, directing viewers to a supposed news article promising huge returns for minimal investments; his solicitors say the video was shown millions of times to social-media users.","causal_attribution":"Surrey Live, on the account of the victim and his solicitors; the outlet calls the clip seemingly AI generated."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'he had initially invested just £400 on the crude oil markets with GBP Markets, but within a few weeks he had lost £40,000.'; 'even borrowing money from his daughter when his own accessible funds ran out.'; 'When he twice asked to withdraw some money to recover his investment, he was ignored.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"He first invested 400 pounds on crude-oil markets with GBP Markets and within a few weeks had lost 40,000 pounds, including money borrowed from his daughter, after a daily 'success manager' pressured him to top up when his displayed balance fell; two withdrawal requests were ignored, and he realised it was a scam only when his daughter sent him an article about fake BBC scams.","causal_attribution":"The victim's account to his solicitors and the outlet."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'The pensioner is now working with solicitors from Richardson Hartley Law'; 'It hurts terribly.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"He is working with Richardson Hartley Law to recover the money from his banks and says the scam hurts terribly and he hopes to get his money back.","causal_attribution":"The victim and his solicitors as quoted."}],"effects":[{"label":"lost 40,000 pounds, some borrowed from his daughter, to a fake trading platform promoted by a deepfake video of a politician; describes being bullied into further deposits and lasting hurt","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/guildford-pensioner-loses-40k-deepfake-34655025","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read on 2026-09-23 through the r.jina.ai reader proxy (the live page returned a 202 challenge shell); Surrey Live, Victoria Shipp, published 22 September 2026 13:45 UTC. Quotes the victim and Richardson Hartley Law.","independence_group":"surrey-live"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["finance","everyday_life"],"unknowns":["When the payments were made (within a few weeks; the article gives no dates).","Who made the deepfake video and on which platforms it ran.","Whether the police or the Financial Conduct Authority are involved and whether any money is recovered.","How the deepfake was verified as AI-generated.","How much of the 40,000 pounds was his own money and how much was borrowed from his daughter (the article gives no split), and whether the 'success manager' was a person."],"geography":{"basis":"The victim is described as a Guildford, Surrey resident (Surrey Live); the article does not state where the video was viewed or the payments made; the scam operators' location is unknown. No court proceeding.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":["GB"],"affected_person_countries":["GB"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as an everyday financial adverse experience: an elderly man lost 40,000 pounds to a scam platform advertised with a deepfake video of a politician, told in his own words and his solicitors' to one outlet (single chain, all claims reported; AI involvement as reported). He is anonymous by choice.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-23"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Surrey Live describes the Farage clip as seemingly AI generated and a deepfake, on the account of the victim's solicitors; no forensic confirmation is reported. The relation is recorded as unknown: the AI impersonated third parties (public figures) to lure him rather than depicting, addressing or acting for him.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["unknown"]},"name":"Guildford: a 72-year-old grandfather lost 40,000 pounds to an investment scam that drew him in with an apparently AI-generated video of Nigel Farage challenging the Bank of England governor on a fake BBC Question Time set; after an initial 400-pound stake a daily 'success manager' pressured him to keep topping up, his withdrawal requests were ignored and he borrowed from his daughter, who later sent him an article about fake BBC scams","summary":"Surrey Live reported on 22 September 2026 that a 72-year-old Guildford pensioner, who asked to remain anonymous, lost 40,000 pounds to an investment scam that used a deepfake video of Nigel Farage. The apparently AI-generated clip showed the Reform UK leader angrily challenging Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey in front of a fake BBC Question Time backdrop, and viewers were directed to a supposed news article promising large returns for small investments. Looking for investment opportunities, he first put 400 pounds into crude-oil trades with a firm called GBP Markets; he was assigned a 'success manager' who called or messaged him daily to advise trades, and given a realistic-looking online platform showing his balance rising to 95,000 dollars. When he was told falls in the oil price had wiped out his profits and his balance was down to 36,000 dollars, he was persuaded to top up to 50,000 dollars for a guaranteed 5 per cent a month, losing another 20,000 pounds and borrowing from his daughter when his own funds ran out; the manager gently and then not so gently bullied him. Two requests to withdraw money were ignored. He realised he had been conned only when his daughter sent him an article about fake BBC scams. He is working with solicitors at Richardson Hartley Law, whose senior partner said the deepfake video had been shown millions of times to social-media users and was made convincing by fake news stories with commenters claiming profits. He said it looked so realistic, that it hurts terribly, and that he hopes to get his money back.","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"unknown","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-09-22","aiSystem":"AI-generated ('deepfake') video impersonating Nigel Farage and Andrew Bailey; described by the outlet as seemingly AI generated; tools not identified","aiProduct":"Unidentified video tool","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["financial_loss","psychological_distress"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"A 72-year-old lost 40,000 pounds, including money borrowed from his daughter, to a fake trading platform promoted by a deepfake video of a politician; he describes being bullied into further deposits, being gutted and hurting terribly. His own account and his solicitors', as reported by one outlet.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One victim, the anonymous Guildford pensioner (Surrey Live). Exact 1.","victimAgeRange":"elderly","jurisdiction":"GB","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"media_coverage","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/guildford-pensioner-loses-40k-deepfake-34655025","primarySourceLabel":"Surrey Live, 22 September 2026: Guildford pensioner loses 40k to deepfake clip of Nigel Farage that plastered social media","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-23T03:46:04.705192+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:38.928792+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["deepfake","investment-scam","united-kingdom","surrey","guildford","elderly","financial-loss","social-media","fake-bbc"]}]}