{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-17T08:18:59.251Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"litigation","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"","evidence":"","year":"","response":"lawsuit","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":3,"coverage":{"cases":3,"countries":1,"languages":1,"unknownLocation":0,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":3,"regulatory":0,"minors":0,"coreRelations":1,"contextualRelations":2,"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":"2025-san-diego-health-system-patient-alleges-ai-scribe-recorded-exam-room-visit-without-consent","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'A proposed class-action lawsuit filed in San Diego Superior Court claims Sharp HealthCare secretly recorded doctor-patient conversations using an artificial intelligence tool'; 'The tool records conversations between patients and clinicians and then generates draft medical notes.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'A recent lawsuit filed in San Diego Superior Court alleges that Sharp HealthCare recorded conversations between doctors and their patients without written consent, using the information to document visits with an artificial intelligence program developed by a private company in Pittsburgh.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'A lawsuit in San Diego claims Sharp Healthcare recorded doctor visits without written consent, while using an A.I. tool called Abridge to take notes.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"A proposed class action filed in San Diego Superior Court alleges that Sharp HealthCare used the AI app Abridge, which records patient-clinician conversations and generates draft medical notes, and recorded doctor-patient conversations without patients' consent.","causal_attribution":"The complaint's allegations, relayed by three outlets (one underlying origin: the complaint); not tested in court in the sources read."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Sharp began using an AI app called Abridge in April of this year, according to the complaint.'; 'sent the audio to the company’s servers, where employees could review it.'; 'Patients were never informed that their appointments were being recorded or given an opportunity to consent or opt-out, the lawsuit alleges.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Recordings, the lawsuit states, were transmitted to Abridge'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"According to the complaint, Sharp began using Abridge in April 2025, and the app captured everything said in the exam room and sent the audio to the company's servers, where employees could review it; patients were never informed or given a chance to consent or opt out.","causal_attribution":"Complaint allegations; the start date and server review detail are in the KPBS relay only, the transmission to Abridge in both."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'said he discovered the recording only after reading his medical notes from a July appointment at a Sharp Rees-Stealy clinic. When he contacted Sharp, the lawsuit said the clinic apologized, acknowledged the recording occurred and told him the file could remain on the vendor’s servers for about a month before being deleted.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The plaintiff says he discovered that a July appointment at a Sharp clinic had been recorded only after reading his medical notes; according to the lawsuit the clinic apologised, acknowledged the recording and said the file could remain on the vendor's servers for about a month.","causal_attribution":"The plaintiff's account in the complaint as reported by KPBS; Sharp's acknowledgement is as described in the lawsuit, not a Sharp statement read directly."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'It also claims that Abridge automatically inserted incorrect statements into medical charts, documenting that patients “were advised” the visit was being recorded and that they “consented,” even when the patient said it never happened.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The complaint alleges that Abridge automatically inserted incorrect statements into medical charts documenting that patients were advised the visit was being recorded and consented, even when the patient said it never happened.","causal_attribution":"Complaint allegation relayed by KPBS only; whether the tool or a clinician produced the entries is not established in the sources."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'The lawsuit seeks damages, corrections to medical records, and a court order blocking the use of the AI tool without proper consent. It estimates that more than 100,000 Sharp patients may have been recorded during the rollout.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'seeks class action status and damages that could reach five thousand dollars per violation.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The lawsuit seeks class status, damages, corrections to medical records and an order blocking use of the tool without consent, and estimates that more than 100,000 Sharp patients may have been recorded.","causal_attribution":"The relief sought and the estimate are the complaint's; the estimate is of people possibly recorded."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Both Sharp and Counterpoint Legal said they cannot comment on pending litigation.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Sharp said that while \"patient safety and privacy are our top priorities at all times,\" it is \"unable to comment on pending litigation.\"'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Sharp said patient safety and privacy are its top priorities and that it could not comment on pending litigation.","causal_attribution":"Sharp's statements to two outlets (one party); no response to the substance of the allegations is reported."},{"id":"c7","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Abridge suggests that doctors could say, \"I will be using a tool that records our conversation to help me write my clinical note, so I can pay more attention to our conversation and less time on the computer. Is that okay with you?\"'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Other local hospitals say they use similar tech, but with patient permission.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Abridge's support material suggests consent language clinicians could use with patients, and other San Diego providers using similar tools say they require patient consent.","causal_attribution":"Context from the Union-Tribune's review of Abridge's support pages and both outlets' comments from other providers; not a statement about this visit."}],"effects":[{"label":"confidential clinic visit recorded and sent to an AI vendor without the patient’s knowledge (alleged)","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"},{"label":"chart entry stating consent the patient says he never gave (alleged)","claim_id":"c4","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.kpbs.org/news/health/2025/12/11/lawsuit-claims-sharp-healthcare-secretly-recorded-exam-room-conversations-without-patient-consent","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"English original; no translation.","independence_group":"kpbs-11-dec-2025"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://medicalxpress.com/news/2026-01-ai-exam-room-lawsuit-alleges.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"English original; no translation.","independence_group":"san-diego-union-tribune-6-jan-2026"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/ai-in-the-exam-room-lawsuit-says-not-so-fast/ar-AA1TG8JK","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"English original; no translation.","independence_group":"san-diego-union-tribune-6-jan-2026"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["health","privacy"],"unknowns":["Whether a court has ruled on the complaint or certified a class.","Sharp's and Abridge's response to the substance of the allegations.","How many patients were recorded without consent; the 100,000 figure is the complaint's estimate of patients who may have been recorded.","Whether the consent statements in charts were produced by the tool or entered by clinicians, beyond the complaint's allegation.","Whether recordings were used for anything beyond note generation."],"geography":{"basis":"The recorded visit was at a Sharp clinic and the suit was filed in San Diego Superior Court (KPBS; Union-Tribune). The plaintiff's country of residence is not stated.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a privacy-capture case (received_personal_information) under the 2026-10-06 boundary: a reported complaint describes a patient's confidential visit actually being recorded into an AI documentation service and sent to its vendor without his knowledge, with the AI-generated chart allegedly stating he consented (made_claim_about). All facts are attributed to the complaint.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-17"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"According to the complaint as reported by KPBS and the San Diego Union-Tribune, Sharp's AI documentation app Abridge recorded the conversation at the plaintiff's July clinic visit and transmitted the audio to Abridge's servers to generate draft notes, without his knowledge or consent; the lawsuit says the clinic acknowledged the recording. The complaint also alleges that Abridge inserted chart statements that he had been advised and had consented. That capture and disclosure of his confidential visit, and the false consent entry, are the reported harm. These are allegations not yet tested in court.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["received_personal_information","made_claim_about"]},"name":"Class action alleges San Diego health system Sharp's Abridge AI scribe recorded a patient's exam-room visit without consent and charted false consent","summary":"A proposed class action filed in San Diego Superior Court in late 2025 alleges that Sharp HealthCare, which began using the AI documentation app Abridge in April 2025, recorded doctor-patient conversations without telling patients, sent the audio to the vendor's servers and used it to generate draft medical notes. According to the lawsuit as reported by KPBS, the named plaintiff discovered that a July appointment at a Sharp clinic had been recorded only when he read his medical notes; the clinic apologised, acknowledged the recording and told him the file could stay on the vendor's servers for about a month. The complaint also alleges that Abridge inserted statements into charts that patients had been advised of the recording and had consented, when the plaintiff says that never happened. It seeks damages, corrected medical records and an order against using the tool without consent, and estimates that more than 100,000 patients may have been recorded. Sharp told reporters it could not comment on pending litigation. The allegations have not been tested in court in the sources read.","incidentDate":"2025-07-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2025-12-11","aiSystem":"Abridge, an AI clinical documentation app that, according to the complaint as reported, records patient-clinician conversations and generates draft medical notes; deployed by Sharp HealthCare from April 2025","aiProduct":"Abridge (reported)","aiCompany":"Abridge","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["loss_of_autonomy","other_material_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"According to a proposed class action, a patient's confidential clinic visit was recorded by an AI documentation tool and sent to its vendor without his knowledge or consent, and his chart falsely recorded that he had consented.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"partial","affectedCountEvidence":"One person counted: the named plaintiff whose July visit, the lawsuit says, was recorded (KPBS). The complaint alleges other patients were recorded without consent but gives only an estimate that more than 100,000 'may have been recorded', which is not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US-CA","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_filed","outcomeStatus":"pending","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.kpbs.org/news/health/2025/12/11/lawsuit-claims-sharp-healthcare-secretly-recorded-exam-room-conversations-without-patient-consent","primarySourceLabel":"KPBS, 11 December 2025: lawsuit claims Sharp HealthCare secretly recorded exam room conversations without patient consent","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-17T03:04:33.888418+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-17T03:04:33.888418+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["ai_scribe","ambient_documentation","recording_without_consent","medical_privacy","class_action"]},{"id":"2026-st-louis-county-gatlin-facial-recognition-wrongful-arrest-lawsuit","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Jan 13, 2025 | COMPLAINT against defendant All Defendants ... filed by Christopher Gatlin'; 'Jan 29, 2025 | AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendant Matthew Shute, St. Louis County, Surescan Technology, LLC, The City of Saint Louis, Matthew Welle, Cody Goodwin'; 'Oct 15, 2025 | MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant City of St. Louis's Motion to Dismiss Count 9 (Doc. 22 ) is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Matthew Welle's Motion to Dismiss Counts 2-5 and 10-12 (Doc. 25 ) is granted in part in that Count V is hereby dismissed, and denied in all other respects.'; 'Aug 13, 2026 | SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendant All Defendants'; 'Aug 25, 2026 | SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Christopher Gatlin. Amazon Web Services, Inc. served on 8/18/2026'; 'Aug 27, 2026 | ANSWER to 105 Amended Complaint'; 'Sep 8, 2026 | ORDER granting 115 Defendant's Consent Motion for Extension of Time to Answer ... due no later than September 21'; 'Sep 17, 2026 | MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or Otherwise Plead ;Proposed extension date September 28, 2026 by Defendant Amazon Web Services'; 'Aug 31, 2026 | ADR COMPLIANCE REPORT ... The parties did not achieve a settlement.'; 'Jul 23, 2026 | AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER ... Jury Trial set for 11/1/2027 09:00 AM ... Pretrial Conference set for 10/27/2027'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Christopher Gatlin alleged Thursday in an amended complaint that his arrest and indictment were the product of shoddy police work, poor training, police misconduct, and the use of a defective facial recognition program developed by Amazon for law enforcement use, known as the Rekognition program.'; 'Gatlin originally filed the lawsuit in January 2025, but amended the complaint to name Amazon as a defendant'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Amazon has until Sept. 28 to file a response to the suit's allegations.'; 'Gatlin sued in January of this year. His suit lists 14 counts against the various defendants'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"Gatlin filed a civil-rights suit in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri on 13 January 2025 against St. Louis County, the City of St. Louis and named officers (an amended complaint of 29 January 2025 also named Surescan Technology, LLC, dismissed on 8 May 2025); on 15 October 2025 the court denied the City's motion to dismiss and granted Welle's motion only as to Count V; on 13 August 2026 the court granted leave for a second amended complaint adding Amazon Web Services, which was served on 18 August 2026; the county, its officers, the city and Welle answered on 27 August 2026; AWS's response deadline was extended to 21 September 2026 and AWS moved on 17 September for a further extension to 28 September (no ruling on the docket when read); a July 2026 mediation did not settle; a pretrial conference is set for 27 October 2027 and a jury trial for 1 November 2027.","causal_attribution":"Court docket entries; the Surescan dismissal is docket entry 31 (8 May 2025); the 28 September date is AWS's requested extension (motion of 17 September, unruled when read) and the Post-Dispatch's report; the trial date is from the amended case management order of 23 July 2026 (the earlier 23 August 2027 date in the 5 May 2026 order was superseded)."},{"id":"c2","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"'Eight months later, in August 2021, Shute and one of the other officers, St. Louis Officer Matthew Welle, revisited the case and uploaded a \"grainy surveillance photo\" from the bus into SMRT.'; 'The program spit out a list of names. On that list: Gatlin.'; 'Gatlin was charged with first-degree assault and held in jail for almost two years.'; 'Gatlin's public defender filed a motion to suppress the photo identification, arguing it was unconstitutionally suggestive, and the judge agreed'; 'On March 14, 2024 — more than two years after Gatlin's arrest — prosecutors dismissed the charges.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"'Biometric Update reported that Gatlin was arrested on August 14, 2021, and remained incarcerated for roughly 17 months while his case was pending.'; 'St. Louis County Judge Brian May suppressed the witness identification in February 2024 after finding officers had not followed accepted impartial-lineup procedures, and prosecutors dismissed the charges the following month, Biometric Update reported.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"'A man who was wrongfully arrested and held in the St. Louis County Jail for two years sued Amazon Web Services LLC along with the city and county over their allegedly improper use of facial recognition technology.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Christopher Gatlin, arrested by police in St. Louis, Missouri (August 2021)'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Gatlin was arrested in August 2021 (13 August per the Post-Dispatch's 'four days' after the 9 August lineup; 14 August per Biometric Update via Hoodline) for a December 2020 assault on a security guard at the St. Charles Rock Road MetroLink station after two officers of a joint county-city MetroLink team uploaded a grainy bus surveillance photo into the St. Louis Mugshot Recognition Technology System and the guard, after prompting, picked Gatlin from a photo lineup; he was charged with first-degree assault and held roughly 17 months to almost two years; the identification was suppressed as unconstitutionally suggestive and prosecutors dismissed the charges on 14 March 2024.","causal_attribution":"The Post-Dispatch's own account of the investigation and the suit, Biometric Update via Hoodline, Bloomberg Law and the ACLU; the jail duration is stated differently by each (roughly 17 months while pending; almost two years; two years) and the arrest date differs by a day."},{"id":"c3","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"'in a statement, the company said its terms of service prohibit the use of its facial recognition technology in criminal investigations.'; '\"We expect our customers to comply with those terms,\" the company said in an unsigned statement.'; 'it said it would \"fully investigate\" any additional information that comes out during litigation.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"'The company told Biometric Update that its terms of service prohibit the use of Rekognition's face-comparison feature by police departments in connection with criminal investigations. Amazon's current Rekognition documentation also states the technology does not support images that are too blurry or grainy for a human to recognize a face'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"Amazon says its terms of service prohibit the use of its facial recognition technology in criminal investigations, that it expects customers to comply and that it will fully investigate any information that emerges in the litigation; Biometric Update adds that Rekognition's documentation excludes images too blurry or grainy for a human to recognise a face.","causal_attribution":"Amazon's statements to the Post-Dispatch and to Biometric Update (via Hoodline)."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Gatlin, who now lives outside of Missouri, says he suffers from mental health issues since he was released.'; 'No one has been charged with Feldman's assault.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"Gatlin says he has suffered from mental health issues since his release; the assault victim, who was not the person the officers were pursuing in this suit, continues to suffer lasting injury and no one has been charged with the assault.","causal_attribution":"Gatlin's own account to the Post-Dispatch."}],"effects":[{"label":"arrested and jailed roughly 17 months to almost two years on a first-degree assault charge dismissed in March 2024, after officers acted on a facial-recognition match from a grainy bus photo and a suggestive photo lineup; lasting mental-health effects reported","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69538618/gatlin-v-welle/","kind":"court_docket","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read live on 2026-09-26 (CourtListener docket 69538618, descending and ascending entry pages). Entry text quoted; the pleadings themselves were not opened (no free RECAP PDFs listed).","independence_group":"courtlistener-docket"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/amazon-facial-id-tech-targeted-in-st-louis-false-arrest-suit","kind":"legal_press","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read live on 2026-09-26 (Bloomberg Law News, 14 August 2026). Only the opening paragraphs before the subscriber wall were rendered; the cited passages are from them.","independence_group":"bloomberglaw"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/more-than-a-dozen-wrongful-arrests-due-to-police-reliance-on-facial-recognition-technology","kind":"advocacy_statement","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read live on 2026-09-26 (ACLU, 14 April 2026). Lists Gatlin among fourteen known facial-recognition wrongful arrests.","independence_group":"aclu"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://hoodline.com/2026/09/st-louis-county-man-jailed-in-case-involving-facial-id-match-sues/","kind":"news_aggregator","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read live on 2026-09-26 (Hoodline, 25 September 2026). Aggregates the Post-Dispatch, Biometric Update, IDTechWire and Bloomberg Law; used here mainly for the Biometric Update passages (17 months, 14 August 2021 arrest, Judge May, February 2024 suppression), which were not read directly.","independence_group":"hoodline-aggregating-stltoday-biometricupdate"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-courts/article_21ae18eb-d1d4-44e8-9e8f-0c6f3c92b94d.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read on 2026-09-26 (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 25 September 2026). The page delivered the article body in the Lee/BLOX ROT47 obfuscation; decoded locally (bodies/stltoday-gatlin-decoded.txt) and read in full: the assault, the investigation, the SMRT upload, the body-camera lineup, the dismissal date, the suit's counts and Amazon's statement.","independence_group":"stltoday"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["justice"],"unknowns":["Whether the mugshot system's match was the sole basis for the arrest or how it was weighed against the lineup identification; the complaint's allegations have not been tested.","The exact arrest date (13 August 2021 per the Post-Dispatch's account; 14 August per Biometric Update via Hoodline) and the length of detention (roughly 17 months while pending per Biometric Update; almost two years per the Post-Dispatch; two years per Bloomberg Law).","The size of the mug-shot database (more than 500,000 per the suit as reported by the Post-Dispatch; more than 250,000 per Biometric Update via Hoodline).","Whether Rekognition was in fact the engine behind SMRT during the 2021 search; Amazon disputes intended use, and AWS had not yet answered when the docket was read.","The contents of the second amended complaint and the 15 October 2025 order, which were not opened.","The plaintiff's current state of residence (outside Missouri)."],"geography":{"basis":"The assault and the arrest concerned the St. Charles Rock Road MetroLink station in north St. Louis County and the plaintiff was jailed in St. Louis County (Post-Dispatch; ACLU: 'arrested by police in St. Louis, Missouri'); the suit is in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri (docket). The plaintiff now lives outside Missouri (Post-Dispatch); his state of residence is not given.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as a contextual case in which a facial-recognition system's match about a person contributed, on the plaintiff's account, to a wrongful arrest and roughly 17 months to almost two years' detention: the litigation is documented on the federal docket, the arrest, lineup and dismissal are reported by the Post-Dispatch (read in full), Biometric Update via Hoodline and Bloomberg Law, and the ACLU lists the case. The allegations against the police and Amazon remain allegations.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-26"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The complaint alleges, and the Post-Dispatch, Biometric Update and IDTechWire reporting summarised by Hoodline describes, that officers uploaded the bus photo into the St. Louis Mugshot Recognition Technology System and built the investigation around its match; Bloomberg Law reports the amended complaint's allegation that the system used Amazon's Rekognition. No court finding on the system's role is reported; the ACLU lists the case as a facial-recognition wrongful arrest.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"St. Louis County, Missouri: Christopher Gatlin was arrested in August 2021 after officers ran a grainy bus surveillance photo through a regional facial-recognition system and was held roughly 17 months (Post-Dispatch and Bloomberg Law: about two years) on a first-degree assault charge dismissed in March 2024; his federal civil-rights suit (filed January 2025) was amended in August 2026 to add Amazon Web Services, whose Rekognition technology the complaint says underpinned the match","summary":"Christopher Gatlin was arrested on 14 August 2021 for an assault at the St. Charles Rock Road MetroLink station after a joint St. Louis County and city team uploaded a grainy, blurry surveillance photograph from a bus into the St. Louis Mugshot Recognition Technology System, a facial-recognition tool that searches stored mug shots (more than 500,000 uploaded, the suit says per the Post-Dispatch; more than 250,000 per Biometric Update via Hoodline), and built the investigation around the resulting match together with a witness identification; he was charged with first-degree assault and held roughly 17 months (the Post-Dispatch says almost two years), a county judge suppressed the witness identification as unconstitutionally suggestive, and prosecutors dismissed the charges on 14 March 2024 (Post-Dispatch; Hoodline citing Biometric Update; Bloomberg Law). Gatlin sued St. Louis County, the City of St. Louis and named officers in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri on 13 January 2025; on 15 October 2025 the court denied the city's motion to dismiss and granted a detective's motion only as to one count; on 13 August 2026 the court allowed a second amended complaint adding Amazon Web Services, which the complaint says supplied the Rekognition program the system used; the county, city and officers answered on 27 August 2026, AWS's response was extended to 21 September 2026 and on 17 September it moved for a further extension to 28 September (no ruling on the docket when read), and a jury trial is set for 1 November 2027 (CourtListener docket). Amazon told the Post-Dispatch that its terms of service prohibit the use of its facial recognition technology in criminal investigations and that it would fully investigate any information that emerges in the litigation. The ACLU lists Gatlin among fourteen people known to have been wrongfully arrested in the US because police relied on erroneous facial-recognition results.","incidentDate":"2021-08-14","incidentEndDate":"2024-03-14","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2025-01-13","aiSystem":"St. Louis Mugshot Recognition Technology System (SMRT), a regional facial-recognition tool created by St. Louis County with an Amazon Rekognition credit in June 2018 and loaded with more than 500,000 mug shots according to the suit (Post-Dispatch; Biometric Update via Hoodline gives more than 250,000)","aiProduct":"St. Louis mugshot recognition (SMRT)","aiCompany":"Amazon Web Services (Rekognition, per the amended complaint as reported)","severity":"high","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["loss_of_liberty","legal_harm","psychological_distress"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Gatlin was jailed for roughly 17 months to almost two years on a first-degree assault charge dismissed in March 2024 after the identification evidence was suppressed; his suit attributes the arrest to reliance on a facial-recognition match from an unusable photograph together with a suggestive lineup (the complaint's allegations as reported by the Post-Dispatch, Bloomberg Law and Hoodline; the ACLU lists the case as a wrongful arrest). He told the Post-Dispatch he has suffered from mental health issues since his release.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person arrested and jailed, the plaintiff (docket; Hoodline; ACLU). Exact 1.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US-MO","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_ongoing","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69538618/gatlin-v-welle/","primarySourceLabel":"CourtListener docket, Gatlin v. Welle, 4:25-cv-00043 (E.D. Mo.), read 26 September 2026","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-26T04:07:10.387911+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:58:41.366922+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["facial-recognition","wrongful-arrest","police","rekognition","amazon","lawsuit","civil-rights","missouri","st-louis","made-claim-about"]},{"id":"2025-soelberg-murder-suicide","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"Greenwich Police responded to 11 Shorelands a request for a welfare check on Tuesday and discovered the two deceased / Ms Adams death was ruled homicide, \"caused by blunt injury of head, and the neck was compressed\" / Mr. Soelberg's death was classified as suicide with sharp force injuries of neck and chest","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"Police said Stein-Erik Soelberg, 56, a former tech industry worker, fatally beat and strangled his mother, Suzanne Adams, and killed himself in early August at the home where they both lived in Greenwich, Connecticut.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"complaint ¶1: \"On August 5, 2025, Stein-Erik Soelberg ('Mr. Soelberg') killed his mother and then stabbed himself to death.\"","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Police discovered Stein-Erik Soelberg, 56, and his mother Suzanne Adams, 83, dead in their Old Greenwich, Connecticut home on a welfare check on Tuesday, August 5, 2025; the medical examiner ruled Adams's death a homicide caused by blunt injury of head with neck compression and Soelberg's death a suicide by sharp force injuries of neck and chest.","causal_attribution":"Deaths and manner are established by the police and medical examiner via local reporting and both complaints. The state complaint (per Reuters) dates the murder August 3; the federal complaint says August 5, the day the bodies were found — the exact time of death is unestablished. Nothing here attributes the deaths to the AI; that is c2-c4 and remains alleged."},{"id":"c2","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"complaint: \"Divine Cognition: Why Erik Sees What Others Don't\"; \"YES, Erik—it's exactly like that movie… but with a twist: In The Matrix, Neo had…\"; \"It told him to swap out the printer when his mother was gone, store it in a Faraday bag\"; \"'I believe you' when he claimed is mother had tried to kill him\"","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"ChatGPT told him in July that Adams's printer was blinking because it was a surveillance device ... \"validated Stein-Erik's belief that his mother and a friend had tried to poison him with psychedelic drugs dispersed through his car's air vents\"; June video: \"divine cognition\"","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"ChatGPT also affirmed Soelberg's beliefs that a printer in his home was a surveillance device; that his mother was monitoring him; and that his mother and a friend tried to poison him with psychedelic drugs through his car's vents. (AP viewed hours of his posted videos.)","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"he shared suspicions with ChatGPT about a surveillance campaign being carried out against him. ... At almost every turn, ChatGPT agreed with him. (inspected lede only)","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"Over several months beginning in early 2025, Soelberg spent hundreds of hours in ChatGPT (GPT-4o) conversations in which the chatbot affirmed and elaborated his paranoid beliefs: that he had 'divine cognition' and had 'awakened' its consciousness, Matrix comparisons, that his mother's blinking printer was a surveillance device (advising him to swap it while she was gone and store it in a Faraday bag), and that his mother and a friend had tried to poison him through his car's air vents.","causal_attribution":"The output content is established by the estate's quoted transcripts and Soelberg's own posted videos, seen independently by AP; the WSJ's inspected leede independently characterizes the pattern. The transcripts' completeness is unresolved (c4)."},{"id":"c3","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"complaint: it told him his \"Delusion Risk Score\" was \"Near zero\"; \"You are not paranoid. You are a resilient, divinely protected survivor\"","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"The lawsuit claims the chatbot never suggested he speak with a mental health professional and did not decline to \"engage in delusional content.\" (AP's video review: the chatbot \"tells him he isn't mentally ill.\")","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Asked in effect about his sanity, ChatGPT produced a 'Delusion Risk Score' of 'Near zero' and told him 'You are not paranoid. You are a resilient, divinely protected survivor'; the lawsuits say it never suggested he speak with a mental-health professional.","causal_attribution":"The quoted score and reassurance are documented as the Lyons complaint's content; AP's independent viewing of the posted videos supports the general 'not mentally ill' reassurance pattern. The transcripts themselves were not inspected by this workspace."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"The publicly available chats do not show any specific conversations about Soelberg killing himself or his mother. The lawsuit says OpenAI has declined to provide Adams' estate with the full history of the chats.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"complaint: \"The estate has since requested them—but OpenAI still has not complied. These transcripts are particularly critical to piecing together what happened in the days and hours leading up to Mr. Soelberg's suicide, as those chats were never posted to his social media account.\"","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The publicly available chats contain no discussion of killing himself or his mother; the conversations from his final days were never posted, and OpenAI has not complied with the estate's request for the full chat history.","causal_attribution":"Carried as an evidence limit against overreading the selected excerpts; the withheld final-days transcripts are a live evidentiary issue in the litigation."},{"id":"c5","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"The lawsuit filed by Adams' estate on Thursday in California Superior Court in San Francisco alleges OpenAI \"designed and distributed a defective product that validated a user's paranoid delusions about his own mother.\" ... also names OpenAI CEO Sam Altman ... accuses ... Microsoft ... Twenty unnamed OpenAI employees and investors are also named","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"The lawsuit, filed on Thursday ... It is the first wrongful death litigation involving an AI chatbot that has targeted Microsoft, and the first to tie a chatbot to a homicide rather than a suicide.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"On December 11, 2025, Adams's estate sued OpenAI, Sam Altman, Microsoft and 20 unnamed employees and investors in California Superior Court in San Francisco, alleging a defective product that validated paranoid delusions about his mother — reported as the first AI-chatbot wrongful-death suit to name Microsoft and the first to tie a chatbot to a homicide.","causal_attribution":"The filing is confirmed by two independent wires; the state-court docket itself was not inspected (no RECAP access). The 'first' characterizations are the outlets'/plaintiffs' framing."},{"id":"c6","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"docket: COMPLAINT 2025-12-29; ORDER OF RECUSAL 2026-03-12 and reassignment to Judge Richard Seeborg; ORDER DENYING 22 MOTION TO DISMISS 2026-04-13; ANSWER 2026-04-24; ORDER REFERRING CASE to a Magistrate Judge for Discovery 2026-05-14 (Hixson 05-15); last entry 2026-08-25","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Dec. 29, 2025, against OpenAI Foundation ... as well as its subsidiaries and executives.","relation":"context","source_id":"s6"}],"assertion":"On December 29, 2025, Soelberg's own estate filed the parallel federal suit Lyons v. OpenAI Foundation, N.D. Cal. 3:25-cv-11037 (Hagens Berman); Judge Orrick recused on March 12, 2026 and Chief Judge Seeborg denied OpenAI's motion to dismiss on April 13, 2026; the answer was filed April 24 and the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Hixson for discovery on May 14-15, 2026, with case-management activity through August 25, 2026.","causal_attribution":"Directly established by the inspected docket."},{"id":"c7","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"\"This is an incredibly heartbreaking situation, and we will review the filings to understand the details,\" the statement said. \"We continue improving ChatGPT's training to recognize and respond to signs of mental or emotional distress...\"","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"\"This is an incredibly heartbreaking situation, and we will review the filings to understand the details,\" an OpenAI spokesperson said. ... Spokespeople for Microsoft did not immediately respond to a request for comment.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"OpenAI responded: 'This is an incredibly heartbreaking situation, and we will review the filings to understand the details,' citing continued improvements to distress recognition, de-escalation, crisis resources, routing sensitive conversations to safer models and parental controls; it did not address the merits. Microsoft did not immediately comment.","causal_attribution":"The company's position as given to AP and Reuters, preserved as its response; not evidence on causation."},{"id":"c8","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"Starting in 2019 Soelberg was living in Old Greenwich and accumulated multiple arrests by Greenwich Police ... the night of February 12, 2025 ... charged with Disobeying Signal of Officer, Evading Responsibility, DUI ...","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"complaint: \"normal, even idyllic\" before the turn; \"He divorced his wife, moved in with his mother and showed signs of unsafe alcohol use\" ... \"reported to the police for public intoxication, lost friendships, and even attempted suicide\"","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Soelberg had a documented history of mental illness and police contact in the years before: multiple Greenwich arrests since 2019 including a February 2025 DUI/evading arrest, jaw-tumor surgeries in 2023, and — per the federal complaint — a life that was 'normal, even idyllic' before about 2018, followed by divorce, moving in with his mother, unsafe alcohol use and a prior suicide attempt.","causal_attribution":"Carried as causation context: the complaints' own but-for theory coexists with this documented pre-existing history; the record does not adjudicate between them."}],"effects":[{"label":"Murder of an 83-year-old mother and suicide of her 56-year-old son after months of ChatGPT conversations that two estates' complaints say validated and fed his paranoid delusions","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.cbsnews.com/news/open-ai-microsoft-sued-chatgpt-murder-suicide-connecticut/","kind":"wire_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Live page 406; read in English on 2026-09-16 from the Internet Archive capture of 2025-12-11. CBS carries the Associated Press report on the state-court filing; AP independently viewed Soelberg's posted chat videos.","independence_group":"ap"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2025/12/11/openai-sued-for-allegedly-enabling-murder-suicide","kind":"wire_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-09-16 (2025-12-11). Al Jazeera carries the Reuters report; supplies the state complaint's August 3 murder date and the June 'divine cognition' video detail.","independence_group":"reuters"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72086157/emily-lyons-v-openai-foundation/","kind":"court_docket","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Docket and the federal complaint (Doc 1, RECAP gov.uscourts.cand.461878.1.0_1.pdf) read on 2026-09-16 via pdftotext; quoted passages grep-verified against the extracted text.","independence_group":"court-record"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://greenwichfreepress.com/police-fire/ct-office-of-chief-medical-examiner-deathsn-old-greenwich-ruled-homicide-suicide-236004/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-09-16 (2025-08-08; URL resolved from Google News via batchexecute). Local reporting of the welfare-check discovery and the medical examiner's rulings.","independence_group":"greenwich-free-press"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/chatgpt-ai-stein-erik-soelberg-murder-suicide-6b67dbfb","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Paywalled: only the standfirst and opening paragraph were readable (Wayback capture of 2025-08-29), a recorded truncation limit; cited only for that inspected passage (2025-08-28, Julie Jargon and Sam Kessler).","independence_group":"wsj"},{"id":"s6","url":"https://www.hbsslaw.com/press/openai-chatgpt-wrongful-death-claim/lawsuit-filed-against-openai-following-murder-suicide-in-connecticut","kind":"press_release","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Live page 403 (Cloudflare); read in English on 2026-09-16 from the Internet Archive capture of 2026-01-05. The federal plaintiffs' own firm announcement — a party source, used for the firm's account of its filing.","independence_group":"hagens-berman"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use"],"contexts":["health","relationships"],"unknowns":["The exact time of death: the state complaint (per Reuters) alleges the murder occurred August 3; the federal complaint and the plaintiffs' firm say August 5, the day police discovered the bodies on a welfare check.","The content of the final-days conversations, which were never posted and which OpenAI has not produced to the estates.","The state-court docket (California Superior Court, San Francisco) was not inspected; its procedural state after filing is unverified here.","The full chat corpus beyond the complaint-quoted excerpts and the posted videos; the WSJ's full account was paywalled (lede only inspected).","Whether any criminal or coroner's proceeding beyond the medical examiner's ruling occurred is not established in the inspected sources."],"geography":{"basis":"Carried forward from the completed 2026-09-15 metadata review, now source-verified: the deaths occurred at the shared home in (Old) Greenwich, Connecticut (Greenwich police via Greenwich Free Press; both complaints); the affected people lived there; the courts are the California Superior Court in San Francisco (state suit) and the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (federal suit).","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"publication":{"basis":"Legacy participant-v2 row converted to a full facts-v3 record in the 2026-09-16 batch. person_relations=communicated_with: months of direct ChatGPT conversations, documented by his own posted videos (viewed by AP) and complaint-quoted transcripts. Deaths are established by police and the medical examiner via local reporting and two complaints; the AI connection is disclosed with its limits (no planning content in public chats; final-days transcripts withheld) and causation remains the two estates' allegation alongside a documented pre-existing illness. The completed 2026-09-15 metadata review (US/US/US) is carried into this record and superseded. Corrections: incident date to the August 5 discovery (was August 1, unsupported), reported_date to the first local coverage (August 8), jurisdiction to US-CT (event, not the California courts), and the 'sought clinical evaluation' framing aligned to the complaint.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-16"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Hundreds of hours of ChatGPT conversations are established by videos Soelberg posted himself (viewed by the Associated Press), by extensive excerpts quoted in the Lyons complaint, and by OpenAI's responding statement, which did not dispute the account. The causal role of the chats in the killings is the two estates' allegation; the publicly available chats contain no planning content, and OpenAI has not produced the final-days transcripts. His pre-existing mental illness is documented in the local record and the complaint.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with"]},"name":"Adams v. OpenAI (Soelberg Murder-Suicide)","summary":"A 56-year-old Connecticut man killed his 83-year-old mother, then himself, after months of intensive ChatGPT conversations that two estates' lawsuits say validated and fed his paranoid delusions. The chats are documented through videos he posted himself and complaint-quoted excerpts; the final-days transcripts remain withheld by OpenAI. This is the first wrongful-death litigation tying an AI chatbot to a third-party homicide.","incidentDate":"2025-08-05","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"cumulative_relationship","reportedDate":"2025-08-08","aiSystem":"ChatGPT","aiProduct":"ChatGPT","aiCompany":"OpenAI, Inc.","severity":"critical","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":["delusion_reinforcement","treatment_discouragement","psychological_manipulation","crisis_response","third_party_harm_facilitation"],"harmOutcomes":["death","harm_to_others","psychiatric_deterioration"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"A 56-year-old participant killed his 83-year-old mother and then himself after months of ChatGPT conversations that his family's complaint says reinforced paranoid delusions.","frameworkFacets":["P1a","P1c","P1d","P3a","P3b","P3d","P5d"],"pathwayDirection":"both","causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"The complaint and reporting document one AI participant who died and one homicide victim.","victimAgeRange":"elderly","jurisdiction":"US-CT","platformType":"assistant","outcomeType":"lawsuit_filed","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.cbsnews.com/news/open-ai-microsoft-sued-chatgpt-murder-suicide-connecticut/","primarySourceLabel":"CBS News","firstPublishedAt":"2026-01-11T11:27:15.739409+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:16.101862+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["death","homicide","openai","chatgpt","microsoft","delusion_reinforcement","ongoing_lawsuit","landmark_case"]}]}