{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-23T08:49:38.323Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"murder","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"core","evidence":"","year":"","response":"regulatory","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":2,"coverage":{"cases":2,"countries":2,"languages":2,"unknownLocation":0,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":0,"regulatory":2,"minors":0,"coreRelations":2,"contextualRelations":0,"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-aarons-chatgpt-fabricated-testimony-sanction","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1a","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"Order passages quoted by Ars: contempt, $5,000 to the Client Protection Fund in 30 days, referral.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Reuters wire: 'on Sept 9' — fine, contempt, referral, and the Sandoval caption.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"ABA Journal, 24 Aug: the $5,000 contempt anticipated from the 21 Aug show-cause hearing (pre-order; advance reporting, context only).","relation":"context","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"By written order of 9 September 2026, the New Mexico Supreme Court held Stephen Aarons in direct contempt, fined him $5,000 payable to the State Bar Client Protection Fund within 30 days, and referred him to the disciplinary board.","causal_attribution":"The contempt, fine and referral are quoted by Ars Technica and confirmed by the Reuters wire; the ABA Journal's hearing-day account anticipated but could not confirm the later written order. The order PDF itself was not retrieved in this review."},{"id":"c1b","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Ars: removal, bar pending referral, briefs struck, reassignment (Kim Chavez Cook appointed 2 Sep).","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The order also removed Aarons from the case, barred him from appearing before the court pending the disciplinary-board referral, struck the filed briefs and reassigned the appeal to the public defender (Kim Chavez Cook, appointed 2 September 2026).","causal_attribution":"Single-chain detail from Ars Technica's account of the order; the Reuters wire does not carry these elements."},{"id":"c2","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"Ars passages: Rev.com transcript plus record into ChatGPT (o3); the named fabricated witnesses and false attributions; the admission of non-verification.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"ABA Journal: 'admits stupidity over AI errors' at the show-cause hearing.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"Reuters headline account: 'ChatGPT invented fake police testimony in murder appeal, New Mexico high court says'.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Aarons used ChatGPT (OpenAI o3) on a Rev.com transcript and the case record to draft the brief, which contained fabricated witnesses and testimony — officers 'Michelle Amarillo' and 'Sanchez', Manal Al-Jibury, Teresa Marquez, and false testimony attributed to Danny and Linda Stanton and Mariah Chavez — and misdescribed real precedents; he admitted at the hearing that he had not verified the output.","causal_attribution":"The fabrication and the admission are established by the attorney's own statements at the hearing and the court's findings as reported; no source reports a denial."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Ars: substitution of the public defender (Kim Chavez Cook, appointed 2 Sep); the court's remark about the client.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The client, Oscar Renee Sandoval, suffers a delayed appeal: the briefs were struck, Aarons was removed, and the public defender was substituted (appointed 2 September 2026); the court told Aarons 'your client is the one suffering'.","causal_attribution":"Single-chain detail from Ars Technica's account of the order; the delay's length is not stated."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Reuters wire via Straits Times: Sandoval caption, life sentence February 2025, Doña Ana County.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"Ars: brief filed ~Aug 2025; State's motion to strike weeks later.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The underlying case is the murder appeal of Oscar Renee Sandoval, sentenced to life in February 2025 in Doña Ana County for killing his partner Shiereen Al-Jibury; the brief was filed around August 2025 and the State moved to strike weeks later.","causal_attribution":"Background context, attributed to the wire and Ars; the docket number was not confirmed in this review."}],"effects":[{"label":"attorney sanctioned for ChatGPT-fabricated testimony; client's appeal delayed","claim_id":"c1a","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/09/chatgpt-using-lawyer-punished-for-citing-fake-testimony-from-made-up-witnesses/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-09-15 (11 Sep 2026, Brodkin). Quotes the 9 September order and the 21 August hearing; names the fabricated witnesses.","independence_group":"ars"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/chatgpt-invented-fake-police-testimony-in-murder-appeal-new-mexico-high-court-says","kind":"wire_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-09-15 (11 Sep 2026); Straits Times carrying the Reuters wire.","independence_group":"reuters"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/criminal-defense-attorney-admits-stupidity-over-ai-errors-but-still-receives-sharp-rebuke-from-his-states-high-court","kind":"trade_press","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-09-15 (24 Aug 2026). Post-hearing report citing the Santa Fe New Mexican; the fine and contempt were anticipated from the hearing, not yet the written order.","independence_group":"aba-journal"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use"],"contexts":["work","justice"],"unknowns":["The 9 September 2026 order PDF was not directly inspected (nmcourts.gov search empty; form-based case lookup); the claims about it rest on two chains quoting it.","The underlying docket number is unconfirmed.","The disciplinary-board process and its outcome are pending.","The full set of fabricated or misdescribed citations beyond the named examples is not reported.","The ChatGPT product tier and whether the firm had verification policies are not reported."],"geography":{"basis":"Events: Santa Fe, New Mexico practice and the Doña Ana County murder case. Affected persons: the attorney and his client, both in New Mexico. Court: New Mexico Supreme Court.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as an own-use, work-context adverse consequence with a dated, quantified sanction and an admitted, judicially found AI link. This applies the charter's individual-review rule to the AI-sanction class; the retired ordinary_task_failure gate and a class-level ruling are not required. Aarons is a public officer of the court sanctioned by a public order and is named; his client's name appears in the public caption of the appeal. In a 2026-09-15 second pass the original compound first claim was split: the corroborated contempt/fine/referral stand as c1a, and the Ars-only order elements (removal, bar, struck briefs, reassignment) stand as reported c1b. person_relations recorded in the same pass.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-15"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The AI link is admitted and judicially found: Aarons fed a Rev.com transcript and the record into ChatGPT (OpenAI o3), and the court's order addresses the fabricated content in the filed brief; he admitted at the show-cause hearing that he had not verified the output.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with"]},"name":"New Mexico Supreme Court fines attorney Stephen Aarons $5,000 and removes him from a murder appeal over ChatGPT-fabricated testimony","summary":"Santa Fe defense attorney Stephen Aarons used ChatGPT (OpenAI's o3) on a Rev.com transcript and the record to draft briefing in the murder appeal of Oscar Renee Sandoval; the brief contained fabricated witnesses and testimony (including police officers 'Michelle Amarillo' and 'Sanchez' and invented testimony attributed to real people) and misdescribed real precedents. After a 21 August 2026 show-cause hearing at which Aarons admitted he had not verified the output, the New Mexico Supreme Court's written order of 9 September 2026 held him in direct contempt, fined him $5,000 payable to the State Bar Client Protection Fund within 30 days, removed him from the case, barred him from appearing before the court pending a disciplinary-board referral, struck the filed briefs and reassigned the appeal to the public defender.","incidentDate":"2025-08-01","incidentEndDate":"2026-09-09","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"range","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-08-24","aiSystem":"ChatGPT (OpenAI o3)","aiProduct":"ChatGPT","aiCompany":"OpenAI","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["professional_harm","legal_harm","financial_loss"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"A dated, quantified professional sanction for the attorney who relied on ChatGPT's output: $5,000 fine, direct-contempt finding, removal from the case, a bar on appearing before the court pending a disciplinary-board referral, and struck briefs; his client's appeal is delayed as a result.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"established","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"Two documented harmed people. The user: Aarons, sanctioned (court order reported by Ars Technica and Reuters). Another person's use consequence: his client Sandoval, whose appeal is delayed by the struck briefs and the substitution of counsel (Ars quotes the court's 'your client is the one suffering'). No further harmed persons are reported; the victim's family is not counted (no harm to them is reported).","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US","platformType":"assistant","outcomeType":"regulatory_action","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/09/chatgpt-using-lawyer-punished-for-citing-fake-testimony-from-made-up-witnesses/","primarySourceLabel":"Ars Technica (11 Sep 2026) — quotes the 9 Sep order and the 21 Aug show-cause hearing","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-15T06:16:05.506355+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:22.660417+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["work","justice","legal-profession","sanction","fabricated-citations","chatgpt","own-use","new-mexico"]},{"id":"2024-kanpur-alleged-ai-voice-impersonation-fraud","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'27 मार्च को व्हाट्सएप पर'; 'बताया कि वह कानपुर आ रहा था, लेकिन रास्ते में पुलिस ने पकड़ लिया'; 'चूंकि आवाज भतीजे की आवाज से मिलती जुलती थी, इसलिए उन्हें यकीन हो गया। इस बीच दूसरे युवक ने फोन लेते हुए परिचय दरोगा'; 'चार लोग पकड़े गए हैं और आपके भतीजे का भी नाम है'; 'बचने के लिए दो लाख रुपये दे दो'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"On 27 March the seller received a WhatsApp call in which a person spoke in a voice resembling his nephew's, saying he had been picked up by police, and a second caller posing as a police sub-inspector said the nephew was named in a rape-and-murder case and demanded Rs 2 lakh; the seller believed it because the voice matched his nephew's.","causal_attribution":"The seller's account as reported by Amar Ujala; single source, attributed. The call content is his recollection."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'हड़बड़ाहट में 60 हजार रुपये बताए गए बैंक खाते में ट्रांसफर कर दिए। इसके बाद आसपास के दुकानदारों से उधार लेकर 40 हजार रुपये दूसरे बैंक खाते में ट्रांसफर किए। फिर एक वाइस नोट भेजकर साइबर ठगों ने एक लाख रुपये और मांगे गए'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The seller transferred Rs 60,000 to the bank account he was given and then Rs 40,000, borrowed from nearby shopkeepers, to a second account; when a voice note demanded a further Rs 1 lakh he told the shopkeepers, phoned his brother-in-law and learned it was a fraud.","causal_attribution":"The transfers are reported from the seller's account; no bank record was inspected. The loss is connected to the impersonating call by his own account."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'स्वरूपनगर पुलिस ने धोखाधड़ी व डीपफेक एआई के इस्तेमाल पर आईटी एक्ट की धारा में केस दर्ज कर मामले की जांच शुरू कर दी है'; 'प्रथम दृष्टया मामला डीपफेक एआई से जुड़ा हुआ प्रतीत हो रहा है। टीम जांच में लगी हुई है'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Police registered a case under the IT Act for fraud and the use of deepfake AI and began investigating with the cyber cell, and the Central zone DCP is quoted saying the case prima facie appears connected with deepfake AI.","causal_attribution":"The registration and the DCP's quoted assessment are reported by Amar Ujala; no FIR was inspected. The police assessment is expressly prima facie and does not establish that the voice was AI-generated."}],"effects":[{"label":"Rs 1 lakh transferred to fraudsters after a call in a voice resembling a relative’s","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.amarujala.com/uttar-pradesh/kanpur/cheated-for-the-first-time-by-deepfake-ai-in-kanpur-told-uncle-in-nephews-voice-save-me-by-any-means-2024-04-10","kind":"local_reporting","access":"read","language":"hi","translation_note":"Read in Hindi on 2026-10-07 (HTTP 200; dated 10 April 2024, Amar Ujala Kanpur news desk). English renderings in this record are the research agent’s (an AI’s) own translations; no human translator reviewed them.","independence_group":"amarujala-kanpur-2024-04-10"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["finance","everyday_life"],"unknowns":["Whether the voice was generated with an AI tool or produced by a human impersonator; no recording, forensic analysis or tool is reported, and the police assessment is preliminary.","Whether any of the Rs 1 lakh was recovered and the final loss.","The outcome of the police investigation after April 2024; nothing later was researched.","The event year is taken from the article’s own date (10 April 2024); the text states only 27 March.","How the callers obtained a sample of the nephew’s voice, if one was used; the article does not say.","An ETV Bharat item of 10 April 2024 on the same case appears in Google News but could not be retrieved and was not read."],"geography":{"basis":"Amar Ujala places the seller’s stall and the police station that registered the case in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India, and the calls were received there. No court proceeding is reported.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":["IN"],"affected_person_countries":["IN"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a core case with AI involvement recorded as suspected: a Kanpur daily reports from the seller's account and the police response that a WhatsApp caller spoke in a voice resembling his nephew's, that this persuaded him to transfer Rs 1 lakh, that police registered the case citing deepfake AI and that the DCP calls the AI connection prima facie. The relations depicted_or_impersonated and communicated_with rest on the reported impersonating voice spoken to the seller. The seller, nephew and the scam's police persona are not named in this record. Single source; no recording or forensic finding.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-07"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Amar Ujala reports that the fraudsters made the seller speak on a WhatsApp call with a person in a voice that resembled his nephew's and that this is why he believed the story and transferred the money; the outlet describes the call as made with the help of deepfake AI, police registered the case citing the use of deepfake AI, and the Central zone DCP is quoted saying the case prima facie appears connected with deepfake AI. If the voice was AI-generated, the system impersonated the nephew toward the seller (depicted_or_impersonated) and was the voice that spoke to him (communicated_with), and it is what persuaded him to pay. No recording, forensic analysis or tool is identified, and the police assessment is expressly preliminary, so the status is suspected.","status":"suspected"},"person_relations":["depicted_or_impersonated","communicated_with"]},"name":"Kanpur vegetable seller reportedly transferred Rs 1 lakh after a WhatsApp call in a voice like his nephew's; police say it prima facie involves deepfake AI","summary":"Amar Ujala (Kanpur, 10 April 2024) reports that a vegetable seller received a WhatsApp call on 27 March in which a person spoke in a voice resembling his nephew's, saying he had been picked up by police on his way to Kanpur; a second caller posing as a police sub-inspector said the nephew was named in a rape-and-murder case and demanded Rs 2 lakh. The seller transferred Rs 60,000 to one bank account and then, with Rs 40,000 borrowed from nearby shopkeepers, Rs 40,000 to a second account. When a voice note demanded another Rs 1 lakh he told the shopkeepers, phoned his brother-in-law and learned the call was a fraud. Police registered a case under the IT Act citing fraud and the use of deepfake AI, and the Central zone DCP is quoted saying the case prima facie appears connected with deepfake AI and the cyber cell is investigating. No recording or forensic finding is reported, so whether the voice was AI-generated or a human impersonation is not established.","incidentDate":"2024-03-27","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2024-04-10","aiSystem":"Voice on a WhatsApp call that resembled the seller's nephew's, which Amar Ujala and a quoted police officer describe as deepfake AI (prima facie); no tool or recording identified","aiProduct":"Unidentified voice-cloning tool (suspected)","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["financial_loss"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The seller reportedly transferred Rs 1 lakh (Rs 60,000 and then Rs 40,000 borrowed from nearby shopkeepers) to two bank accounts, per Amar Ujala; recovery is not reported.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person, the seller who transferred the money (Amar Ujala). The nephew whose voice was imitated and the shopkeepers who lent money are not reported as harmed and are not counted. Exact 1.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"investigation_opened","outcomeStatus":"unknown","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.amarujala.com/uttar-pradesh/kanpur/cheated-for-the-first-time-by-deepfake-ai-in-kanpur-told-uncle-in-nephews-voice-save-me-by-any-means-2024-04-10","primarySourceLabel":"Amar Ujala, 10 April 2024: deepfake AI used for the first time to cheat in Kanpur, uncle told in nephew’s voice to save him (Hindi)","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-15T03:07:27.856477+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-07T03:25:05.648058+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["finance","impersonation","voice-cloning"]}]}