{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-22T11:15:30.612Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"reputation","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"","evidence":"","year":"2024","response":"regulatory","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":3,"coverage":{"cases":3,"countries":3,"languages":2,"unknownLocation":0,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":0,"regulatory":3,"minors":1,"coreRelations":3,"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":"2024-italy-tv-satire-show-ai-deepfakes-of-journalist-mentana-privacy-regulator-warns-broadcaster","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'per alcuni servizi di Striscia la Notizia, nei quali l’immagine e la voce di Enrico Mentana erano state manipolate mediante l’impiego di sistemi di intelligenza artificiale.'; 'Nei filmati venivano attribuite al noto giornalista dichiarazioni mai pronunciate, mentre la sua immagine era collocata virtualmente nello studio televisivo dell’emittente per la quale lavora.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'servizi costruiti prendendo come spunto fatti che hanno coinvolto diversi personaggi pubblici e accompagnandoli con commenti di vario genere pronunciati dal deepfake del reclamante doppiato con sistemi di intelligenza artificiale'; 'è stata utilizzata l’immagine reale del reclamante, ripresa peraltro all’interno dello studio televisivo da cui il medesimo dirige un telegiornale di fascia serale, alterandone la genuinità attraverso un doppiaggio effettuato con strumenti tali da non rendere chiaramente percepibile l’esistenza della predetta alterazione'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Striscia la Notizia aired segments in which the image and voice of journalist Enrico Mentana were manipulated with AI systems, attributing to him statements he never made while placing his image in the studio of the channel he works for.","causal_attribution":"The regulator's findings in its decision and press release; R.T.I. itself describes computer-generated dubbing."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'nella puntata di venerdì 8 novembre manderà in onda un servizio che vedrà protagonista Enrico Mentana, ma in versione deepfake, ovvero con voce e immagini generati dall’intelligenza artificiale.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"A preview published on 8 November 2024 describes a Striscia la Notizia segment airing that evening in which a deepfake Mentana, with voice and images generated by AI, commented on a game show.","causal_attribution":"A press preview of the programme; it establishes that such segments aired from at least November 2024, not which segments the complaint listed (the decision redacts their dates)."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'moltissime persone hanno creduto che i video, prodotti da Striscia la Notizia e divulgati sul mezzo televisivo e sui social, fossero reali'; 'rivelano come molte persone siano convinte che le dichiarazioni siano autentiche, determinando con ciò una gravissima lesione dell’onore, della reputazione e della propria professionalità'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Mentana complained to the Garante that many people believed the videos were real and that users' insulting comments showed serious harm to his honour, reputation and professionalism.","causal_attribution":"The complainant's submissions as recorded in the decision."},{"id":"c4","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'il realismo delle immagini, la scarsa percepibilità dell’alterazione e la plausibilità delle dichiarazioni avrebbero potuto indurre il pubblico a ritenere autentici i contenuti. Anche le avvertenze sulla natura artificiale dei video non sono state ritenute sufficientemente chiare'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'amplificando altresì il rischio di farne veicolo di disinformazione per il pubblico, come confermato dai numerosi messaggi di scherno e/o di offesa ricevuti via social dal reclamante'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The Garante found that the content could lead the public to consider it authentic, that the warnings were not sufficiently clear, and that the real studio setting amplified the risk of disinformation, as confirmed by the numerous mocking or offensive messages Mentana received on social media.","causal_attribution":"The regulator's findings; the regulator's reference to the messages rests on material in the complaint."},{"id":"c5","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Il Garante ha quindi accertato la violazione dell’articolo 5 del GDPR'; 'ha adottato nei confronti di R.T.I. Spa un provvedimento di ammonimento e ha vietato l’ulteriore utilizzo dei dati di Enrico Mentana con le modalità contestate'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'dispone il divieto di ulteriore trattamento dei dati del reclamante con le modalità sopra descritte, eccettuata la mera conservazione degli stessi ai fini di un loro eventuale utilizzo in sede giudiziaria'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The Garante found breaches of GDPR Articles 5 and 25, warned R.T.I. and prohibited further processing of Mentana's data in the contested way, except retention for judicial use.","causal_attribution":"The dispositive part of the decision."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'l’unica attività realizzata da R.T.I. è stata quella di disporre, con riguardo ai predetti filmati, il doppiaggio del dott. Mentana, con voce diversa dalla sua, attraverso appositi sistemi informativi'; 'la finalità dei servizi oggetto di reclamo è quella di esercitare il diritto di satira ricorrendo all’imitazione del reclamante'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"R.T.I. argued that its only intervention was dubbing licensed footage with a different, computer-generated voice, that the segments were satire, and that disclaimers made clear it was not the real Mentana speaking.","causal_attribution":"The broadcaster's submissions as recorded in the decision; the Garante did not accept them."}],"effects":[{"label":"AI deepfake segments attributing invented statements to a journalist","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"mocking or offensive messages and risk to reputation found by the regulator","claim_id":"c4","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.garanteprivacy.it/home/docweb/-/docweb-display/docweb/10281135","kind":"press_release","access":"read","language":"it","translation_note":"Read in Italian by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-17 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. Garante press release of 7 August 2026; HTTP 200.","independence_group":"garante-privacy"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.garanteprivacy.it/home/docweb/-/docweb-display/docweb/10281021","kind":"official_record","access":"read","language":"it","translation_note":"Read in Italian by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-17 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. Garante decision of 23 July 2026 (doc. web 10281021), read in full; dates and names of counsel are redacted as XX; HTTP 200.","independence_group":"garante-privacy"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://dilei.it/spettacolo/striscia-la-notizia-enrico-mentana-svela-il-vero-volto-stefano-de-martino/1587080/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"it","translation_note":"Read in Italian by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-17 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. DiLei entertainment preview, 8 November 2024; HTTP 200.","independence_group":"dilei-8-nov-2024"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["work","privacy","justice"],"unknowns":["Which segments the complaint covered and when they aired; the decision redacts the dates.","Which AI tools were used.","Whether R.T.I. challenged the decision in court and what measures it reported to the Garante."],"geography":{"basis":"The segments were aired by R.T.I. (Reti Televisive Italiane) on Striscia la Notizia and investigated by Italy's data protection authority; the depicted person is the director of La7's news bulletin. His country of residence is not stated. No court proceeding is reported.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":["IT"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a core case (depicted_or_impersonated): Italy's data protection authority found that a broadcaster's AI deepfakes of a journalist could be taken as authentic, noted the offensive messages he received, warned the broadcaster and barred further use. The journalist is a public figure who brought the complaint and is named.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-17"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Italy's data protection authority, after an investigation of the complaint, states that the journalist's image and voice were manipulated with AI systems in the segments and that statements he never made were attributed to him; the broadcaster told the authority it dubbed the footage with a computer-generated voice. The authority found the content could be taken as authentic and cited the mocking or offensive messages he received, which is the reported harm.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["depicted_or_impersonated"]},"name":"Italy's privacy regulator warns broadcaster R.T.I. and bars further use of AI deepfakes of journalist Enrico Mentana in Striscia la Notizia segments","summary":"The satirical television programme Striscia la Notizia, published by R.T.I., aired segments in which the image and voice of the journalist Enrico Mentana, director of La7's news bulletin, were, according to the Garante, manipulated with AI systems so that he appeared in his own studio making statements he never made (its decision describes real footage from his studio altered by AI dubbing); a November 2024 preview describes one such segment. After Mentana complained, Italy's data protection authority (Garante) found on 23 July 2026 that the realism of the images, the low perceptibility of the alteration and the plausibility of the statements could lead the public to think the content authentic, and that the disclaimers were not clear enough. It found breaches of GDPR Articles 5 and 25, issued a warning to R.T.I. and prohibited further processing of his data in that way. The Garante noted the numerous mocking or offensive messages he received on social media. R.T.I. argued that the segments were satire, that it only dubbed licensed footage with a computer-generated voice, and that its disclaimers made the deepfake evident. No fine was imposed.","incidentDate":"2024-11-08","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"repeated_interactions","reportedDate":"2026-08-07","aiSystem":"AI systems used by the programme to manipulate the journalist's image and voice (the Garante); R.T.I. describes computer-generated dubbing of licensed footage. No product is named.","aiProduct":"Unidentified video tool","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Italy's data protection authority found that AI deepfakes of a journalist on a satirical TV programme could be taken as authentic and noted the numerous mocking or offensive messages he received; it warned the broadcaster and barred further use.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: the journalist depicted in the deepfakes, whose complaint the Garante upheld (decision 10281021). Viewers are an audience and are not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"IT","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"regulatory_action","outcomeStatus":"unknown","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.garanteprivacy.it/home/docweb/-/docweb-display/docweb/10281135","primarySourceLabel":"Garante per la protezione dei dati personali, press release, 7 August 2026: stop to satirical deepfakes of Enrico Mentana","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-17T03:08:22.075012+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-17T03:08:22.075012+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["deepfake","voice_synthesis","television","satire","data_protection_authority","gdpr"]},{"id":"2024-florida-judicial-candidate-shared-likely-ai-fake-call-of-justices-suspended","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'She referenced a former court employee’s book — which she hadn’t read — and sent the paper a link to the author’s website with a deepfake recording of a conversation between Florida Supreme Court justices and the Ninth Judicial Circuit chief judge.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'referenced the book when trying to obtain an endorsement from the South Florida Sun Sentinel during her 2024 judicial election campaign, according to a May 9 notice of ethics charges' and 'She supplied the fake recording, purportedly of a conversation involving two Florida Supreme Court justices, when the newspaper’s editorial board questioned the book’s claims.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"During her 2024 judicial campaign, while seeking the South Florida Sun Sentinel editorial board's endorsement, the candidate supplied a recording purportedly of a conversation between Florida Supreme Court justices and the Ninth Judicial Circuit's chief judge when the board questioned her claims.","causal_attribution":"Bloomberg Law's account of the case and the ABA Journal's report of the commission's notice both derive from the record of the same disciplinary proceeding, so the claim is recorded as reported."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'“The recording is fabricated, likely using computer manipulation or generative-AI,” the notice of charges says. “While the voices resemble those of the purported participants, the manner of speech, tone, and much of the content are objectively unrealistic.”'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'“The recording is fabricated, likely using computer manipulation or generative-AI. While the voices resemble those of the purported participants, the manner of speech, tone, and much of the content are objectively unrealistic,” the notice said.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The Judicial Qualifications Commission's notice of charges said the recording was fabricated, likely using computer manipulation or generative AI, and that while the voices resemble those of the purported participants, the manner of speech, tone and much of the content are objectively unrealistic.","causal_attribution":"Both outlets quote the same notice, so this is one origin. The commission states AI generation as likely, alongside computer manipulation; no forensic analysis or creator is reported."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'she provided a link to a “fabricated phone call” between two justices — Chief Justice Carlos Muniz and Justice Renatha Francis — and the 9th Circuit’s chief judge, Lisa Munyon, Friday’s notice said' and 'your actions eroded public confidence by perpetuating a false perception of illegal, unethical, or immoral conduct by justices of the Florida Supreme Court, a chief judge, and others working within the judicial branch,” the notice said.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The notice named Chief Justice Carlos Muñiz, Justice Renatha Francis and Chief Judge Lisa Munyon as the purported participants and said the candidate's actions perpetuated a false perception of illegal, unethical or immoral conduct by justices of the Florida Supreme Court, a chief judge and others in the judicial branch.","causal_attribution":"The notice's own characterisation of the harm to the depicted judges, reported by one outlet."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Peffer admitted to listening to a portion of the recording and sharing it publicly “despite clear evidence of its inauthenticity,” according to the notice.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"'testifies during her ethics violation hearing at the Broward County Courthouse in Fort Lauderdale on Dec. 16, 2025' and '\"I cannot justify or explain why now listening to it I thought it was a valid piece of content at the time, but I did,\" she said.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"'Peffer gave this statement to Law.com:' and 'my reference to content created by a third party—to whom I have absolutely no ties—was a violation of the Judicial Canons' and 'I take responsibility for my actions and apologize for the unfortunate effects the reference may have caused my fellow judiciary members.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"According to the notice, the candidate listened to only a portion of the recording and shared it publicly despite clear evidence of its inauthenticity. In a statement reported in May 2025 she apologised and said the content was created by a third party with whom she had no ties, and at the December 2025 hearing she testified that she could not explain why she had thought it was valid content.","causal_attribution":"The notice's findings and the candidate's own statements; each part rests on a single report of its origin."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'A Florida trial judge has been suspended for 30 days and fined $10,000' and 'her conduct undermined public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary by promoting false accusations against the judiciary of the Ninth Judicial Circuit and by implicating sitting Florida Supreme Court justices,” the opinion said.' and 'Justices Carlos G. Muñiz and Renatha S. Francis, who had their voices spoofed in the call, recused from the decision.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The Florida Supreme Court, in an unauthored opinion issued on 9 October 2026, suspended the judge for 30 days and fined her $10,000, saying her conduct undermined public confidence in the judiciary by implicating sitting Florida Supreme Court justices; Justices Muñiz and Francis, whose voices were spoofed in the call, recused.","causal_attribution":"Reported by Bloomberg Law from the opinion, which was not inspected; the sanction concerns the candidate's own conduct in sharing the recording."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Florida's courts watchdog agency has recommended a 30-day suspension, a public reprimand and a $10,000 fine' and 'perpetuated a false and undignified perception of the judiciary that ensnared not only those justices and judges who were specifically named in the Book and the Recording'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"The commission's hearing panel recommended a 30-day suspension, a public reprimand and a $10,000 fine, writing that the judge had perpetuated a false and undignified perception of the judiciary that ensnared the justices and judges named in the book and the recording.","causal_attribution":"The hearing panel's filing as reported in one outlet."},{"id":"c7","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Francis, Muñiz, and Munyon all said the recording was fake.' and 'The Sentinel reported last year that it and several other alleged fakes were referred to the Orange County Sheriff’s Office for a criminal investigation.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"Florida Politics reported that Chief Justice Muñiz, Justice Francis and Chief Judge Munyon all said the recording was fake, and that the Sun Sentinel had reported the previous year that it and several other alleged fakes were referred to the Orange County Sheriff's Office for a criminal investigation.","causal_attribution":"The depicted judges' statements as reported by one outlet; who made the criminal referral and its outcome are not reported."},{"id":"c8","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Disposition (SC) - Suspended/Public Reprimand (JQC - Before FSC)' and '2026-10-09T14:35:48.780Z' and 'the Court hereby approves the hearing panel's findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations to this Court.' and 'Respondent, Lauren Nichole Peffer, is hereby fined $10,000.00 and is suspended for 30 days from her duties as a judge of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit.' and 'We order Respondent to pay the costs of these proceedings' and 'Respondent shall also receive a public reprimand, which will be accomplished by publication of this order.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s6"}],"assertion":"On 9 October 2026 the Florida Supreme Court approved the hearing panel's findings of fact, conclusions of law and recommendations, fined the judge $10,000, suspended her for 30 days, ordered her to pay the costs of the proceedings and imposed a public reprimand to be accomplished by publication of the order.","causal_attribution":"Established by the court's docket entry for the disposition; the sanction concerns the judge's own conduct in sharing the recording."}],"effects":[{"label":"a fabricated recording imitating the voices of two Supreme Court justices and a chief judge was presented to a newspaper editorial board in a judicial campaign","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"the judicial watchdog said it perpetuated a false perception of misconduct by the judges it depicted","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"},{"label":"the candidate who shared it was later suspended for 30 days and fined","claim_id":"c5","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/florida-judge-suspended-over-deepfake-call-mimicking-justices","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-12 on news.bloomberglaw.com (HTTP 200). The page shows the article text through the case citation and then a login prompt; any later text was not inspected. No translation was needed and no human reviewer inspected the text.","independence_group":"bloomberg-law-peffer"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/florida-judge-is-accused-of-sharing-objectively-unrealistic-fake-recording-with-editorial-board","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-12 on abajournal.com (HTTP 200). No translation was needed and no human reviewer inspected the text.","independence_group":"aba-journal-peffer"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://flaglerlive.com/lauren-peffer-fake/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-12 on flaglerlive.com, which carries the News Service of Florida report (HTTP 200). No translation was needed and no human reviewer inspected the text.","independence_group":"news-service-of-florida-peffer"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/florida-judge-cited-deepfake-call-180000031.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-12 on the Yahoo News syndicated copy (provider Tampa Bay Times), HTTP 200. Yahoo and the Tampa Bay Times canonical URL date the copy 10 October 2026, while its text describes the hearing panel recommendation filed \"Friday\" (the Florida Supreme Court docket lists the findings and recommendations on 27 February 2026), so the text appears to republish earlier reporting. No translation was needed and no human reviewer inspected the text.","independence_group":"tampa-bay-times-peffer"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://floridapolitics.com/archives/737787-broward-judge-faces-charges-for-sharing-deepfake-recording-unread-e-book-during-campaign/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the verification agent (an AI) on 2026-10-12 from an Internet Archive capture of 12 May 2025 (the live page returned HTTP 403). It reports the commission's notice of charges and earlier Sun Sentinel reporting. No translation was needed and no human reviewer inspected the text.","independence_group":"florida-politics-peffer"},{"id":"s6","url":"https://acis.flcourts.gov/portal/court/68f021c4-6a44-4735-9a76-5360b2e8af13/case/ac1415dc-cff8-4197-9e1f-db5cd39262a3","kind":"court_docket","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Docket entry texts read in English by the verification agent (an AI) on 2026-10-12 through the public data interface behind this docket page. The documents attached to the entries (the notices of charges, the hearing panel findings and the disposition order) sit behind an automated challenge and were not opened. No human reviewer inspected the text.","independence_group":"florida-supreme-court-docket-sc2025-0647"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["justice","elections","public_life"],"unknowns":["Who created the recording and with what tool or method; the commission says computer manipulation or generative AI.","The date in 2024 when the recording was supplied to the editorial board; Florida Politics says the Sun Sentinel reported on the recording in July 2024.","Whether the hearing panel's findings, which the Florida Supreme Court approved, or the court's order attribute the recording to AI; neither document was opened.","How widely the recording circulated, who referred it for criminal investigation and with what result, and whether the depicted judges reported any consequence beyond saying it was fake."],"geography":{"basis":"The recording was supplied to the South Florida Sun Sentinel editorial board during a campaign for a Broward County court seat in Florida, and the depicted judges sit on the Florida Supreme Court and Florida's Ninth Judicial Circuit, per all inspected reports. The disciplinary proceeding was decided by the Florida Supreme Court.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"publication":{"basis":"News reports of the disciplinary proceeding (Bloomberg Law on the Supreme Court decision; the ABA Journal, the News Service of Florida and Florida Politics on the commission's notice of charges) describe a recording imitating the voices of two justices and a chief judge, presented to an editorial board in a judicial campaign. The commission, which examined the recording, said it was fabricated, likely using computer manipulation or generative AI, and said it created a false perception of misconduct by the depicted judges. AI involvement is recorded as suspected.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-12"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission, which examined the recording in bringing charges, stated in its notice that the recording \"is fabricated, likely using computer manipulation or generative-AI\", and that the voices resemble those of the purported participants while the manner of speech, tone and content are objectively unrealistic. Bloomberg Law reports that the two justices \"had their voices spoofed in the call\". The recording's imitation of the judges' voices is what presented them as discussing the book and is the basis of the commission's finding of a false perception of misconduct. The commission's attribution is hedged between computer manipulation and generative AI, its technical basis beyond listening to the recording is not disclosed, and no creator or tool is identified.","status":"suspected"},"person_relations":["depicted_or_impersonated"]},"name":"Florida: judge suspended for sharing, as a 2024 candidate, a fabricated call of justices the judicial watchdog says was likely computer-manipulated or AI-made","summary":"While campaigning in 2024 for a Broward County court seat, Lauren Peffer, now a county judge, sought the endorsement of the South Florida Sun Sentinel editorial board. Asked to back her claim of an image crisis in Florida's judiciary, she cited a self-published book by a fired employee of the Ninth Judicial Circuit and supplied a recording purportedly of a phone call about the book between Chief Justice Carlos Muñiz, Justice Renatha Francis and the circuit's chief judge, Lisa Munyon. The Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission's notice of formal charges, filed in May 2025, said the recording was fabricated, likely using computer manipulation or generative AI, and that while the voices resembled those of the participants, the manner of speech, tone and much of the content were objectively unrealistic. The notice said she had shared it despite clear evidence of its inauthenticity and had perpetuated a false perception of illegal, unethical or immoral conduct by the justices, a chief judge and others in the judicial branch. Peffer apologised, said the content was created by a third party with whom she had no ties, and testified that she could not explain why she had thought it valid. According to Bloomberg Law, the Florida Supreme Court on 9 October 2026 suspended her for 30 days and fined her $10,000, saying her conduct undermined public confidence in the judiciary by implicating sitting justices; the two justices whose voices were faked recused. Who made the recording, and with what tool, is not reported.","incidentDate":"2024-01-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"year","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2025-05-11","aiSystem":"An audio recording, posted on a website associated with a former court employee, that faked the voices of two Florida Supreme Court justices and a circuit chief judge. The Judicial Qualifications Commission's notice of charges said it was fabricated, likely using computer manipulation or generative AI. No tool or creator is identified in the inspected reports.","aiProduct":"Unidentified voice-cloning tool (suspected)","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"According to the Judicial Qualifications Commission's notice of charges and the Florida Supreme Court opinion as reported, a fabricated recording that imitated the voices of two Supreme Court justices and a circuit chief judge was presented to a newspaper editorial board during a judicial campaign, and the notice said it perpetuated a false perception of illegal, unethical or immoral conduct by those judges. The candidate who shared it was later suspended and fined. All three judges said the recording was fake, according to Florida Politics; no further consequence for them is reported.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":3,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"Three people: the two Florida Supreme Court justices and the circuit chief judge whom the recording purported to capture, named in the FlaglerLive report of the notice of charges; Florida Politics reports that all three said the recording was fake. The candidate who shared the recording is not counted as harmed by it; newspaper staff and the public are not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US-FL","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"regulatory_action","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/florida-judge-suspended-over-deepfake-call-mimicking-justices","primarySourceLabel":"Bloomberg Law, 9 October 2026: FL Judge Suspended Over Deepfake Call Mimicking Justices","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-12T03:18:31.150274+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-12T03:18:31.150274+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["deepfake","voice-impersonation","judiciary","election","florida","public-figure","judicial-discipline"]},{"id":"2025-valencia-spain-deepfake-school","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'began investigating in December last year after a female student reported the creation of a social media account in her name that featured an AI-generated video'; '\"All these photos had been modified from the originals, which had been manipulated so that the people in them appeared completely naked\"'; 'a webpage devoted to advertising the images for commercial purposes'; 'After 15 other minors came forward with similar complaints'; 'a 17-year-old boy was being investigated on suspicion of corrupting minors'.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"From December 2024 a girl in the Ribera Alta area reported fake accounts in her name with an AI-generated video and AI-manipulated nude photos of minors, plus a webpage advertising the images commercially; 15 other minors complained; the Guardia Civil traced the accounts to a 17-year-old schoolmate, now investigated for corrupting minors under a Valencia youth court.","causal_attribution":"Guardia Civil statement as reported by the Guardian; single chain."}],"effects":[{"label":"16 minors depicted in AI-generated nude images and videos on fake accounts, one impersonated by name, images advertised for sale","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jul/27/spanish-teenager-investigated-ai-generated-nude-videos","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-09-18 (The Guardian, 27 July 2025). Reports and quotes the Guardia Civil's statement of 27 July 2025; the Spanish original of the statement was not read.","independence_group":"guardian"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["education","privacy","justice"],"unknowns":["The outcome of the youth-court proceeding is not known.","The AI tools and the platforms hosting the accounts are not named.","Whether any images were actually sold is not stated."],"geography":{"basis":"Guardia Civil officers in the Ribera Alta area of Valencia province investigated; the victims are the suspect's schoolmates there; a youth court in Valencia oversees the case (Guardian).","court_countries":["ES"],"event_countries":["ES"],"affected_person_countries":["ES"]},"publication":{"basis":"Restored under the 2026-09-15 charter as a harmful-artifact case involving identified (unnamed) depicted minors, an impersonation and a police investigation under a youth court. One chain read; claims recorded as reported. Original ID and first-publication timestamp preserved; incident date corrected to the first complaint.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-18"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The Guardia Civil statement, as quoted by the Guardian, describes AI-generated videos and AI-modified photos and a website advertising AI image-modification services; no forensic detail is published. The artifacts depicted the minors and impersonated one girl by name.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["depicted_or_impersonated"]},"name":"Ribera Alta, Valencia: a 17-year-old was investigated for making AI-generated nude images and videos of 16 schoolmates, impersonating a girl on fake accounts and advertising the images for sale","summary":"In December 2024 a female student in the Ribera Alta area of Valencia province reported to the Guardia Civil that a social-media account had been created in her name featuring an AI-generated video, and later a second account in her name, other accounts showing AI-generated nude videos, and a webpage advertising the images for commercial purposes; the Guardia Civil said the photos, all of minors, had been manipulated so that the people in them appeared completely naked. After 15 other minors came forward with similar complaints, officers traced IP addresses and account emails to the home of a 17-year-old schoolmate, who is being investigated on suspicion of corrupting minors under a Valencia youth court. The Guardia Civil announced the investigation on 27 July 2025.","incidentDate":"2024-12-01","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"repeated_interactions","reportedDate":"2025-07-27","aiSystem":"AI image and video manipulation tools (not named; police examined a website advertising AI image-modification services)","aiProduct":"Unidentified image and video tool","severity":"high","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["exploitation_or_abuse","psychological_distress","reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Sixteen minors were depicted in AI-generated nude images and videos published on fake accounts, with one girl also impersonated by name, and the images were advertised for sale; a schoolmate is under youth-court investigation.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":16,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One complainant plus 15 other minors who came forward with similar complaints (Guardian, quoting the Guardia Civil): exact count of 16 depicted minors.","victimAgeRange":"minor","jurisdiction":"ES","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"investigation_opened","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jul/27/spanish-teenager-investigated-ai-generated-nude-videos","primarySourceLabel":"The Guardian, 27 July 2025: Spanish teenager investigated over AI-generated nude videos of 16 schoolmates (Guardia Civil statement)","firstPublishedAt":"2026-03-09T05:45:25.741735+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:20.032625+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["deepfake","ai-generated-imagery","minors","school","impersonation","spain","valencia","guardia-civil","youth-court","depicted"]}]}