{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-24T06:45:01.130Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"withdrawal","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"contextual","evidence":"","year":"","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":2,"coverage":{"cases":2,"countries":2,"languages":1,"unknownLocation":0,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":0,"regulatory":1,"minors":0,"coreRelations":0,"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":"2024-tasmania-parole-board-ai-hallucinated-case-law-media-condition-quashed","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"In December 2024, the Parole Board of Tasmania added a condition that she not speak \"directly or indirectly with any media outlet to claim (her) alleged innocence and/or wrongful conviction\".","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"This was replaced by a new parole condition in May 2025","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"The condition was tweaked in 2025 to prevent her from communicating directly or indirectly - including through third parties and written statements - with media about her alleged innocence","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"The Supreme Court declared that conditions imposed by the Parole Board of Tasmania in December 2024 and May 2025 were invalid and unlawful.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"In December 2024 the Parole Board of Tasmania added a parole condition barring the parolee from communicating with media to claim her innocence or wrongful conviction, and a broader condition replaced it in May 2025.","causal_attribution":"Not a causal claim."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"used artificial intelligence to prepare a rationale justifying the parole condition, citing case law that was \"fictitious\" and likely \"AI hallucinations\".","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"relied upon by the board in creating the conditions, included erroneous AI information, the court was told.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"\"As we now know, those cases didn't exist,\" he said.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Her counsel told the Supreme Court that the board's secretary used artificial intelligence to prepare a rationale document justifying the condition and that the case law it cited did not exist.","causal_attribution":"Counsel's statement in court is reported by ABC and AAP. These accounts do not independently verify the generation history or identify the tool. The document itself was not inspected."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"the Board’s decision-making was affected by a document containing legal authorities that were likely AI-generated hallucinations and did not in fact exist","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"Justice Estcourt also found that when the parole board made the decision to impose this condition, it had relied on a document that cited case law that was \"fictitious\" and likely \"AI hallucinations\".","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"The Human Rights Law Centre says the State conceded the board's decision-making was affected by a document containing nonexistent authorities likely generated by AI. ABC's 19 September report says the court found the board had relied on the document when imposing the condition.","causal_attribution":"The State's concession as reported by the applicant's representative, and the ABC's report of the court's finding. The ABC's 15 September report says the judge heard this; its 19 September report says the judge found it. The AI origin is stated as likely."},{"id":"c4","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"Today in the Supreme Court in Hobart, Justice Stephen Estcourt ruled the condition was invalid because it denied her procedural fairness, was legally unreasonable, and created uncertainty.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Justice Stephen Estcourt found the condition was made without procedural fairness, was legally unreasonable and was filled with uncertainty.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"ABC and AAP report that on 15 September 2026 Justice Stephen Estcourt of the Supreme Court of Tasmania ruled the condition invalid because it denied procedural fairness, was legally unreasonable and created uncertainty.","causal_attribution":"The reported grounds of invalidity are procedural fairness, unreasonableness and uncertainty; the AI document is not reported as a separate ground."},{"id":"c5","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"The parole board decided to withdraw the condition in August and did not contest it being set aside on Tuesday.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"Mr Coleridge said the parole board met and withdrew the condition that same month","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The board withdrew the condition in August 2026 and did not contest it being set aside.","causal_attribution":"Not a causal claim."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"The court heard that in August","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"brought to the court's attention that the case law referred to in the document did not exist.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Her lawyers raised in August 2026 that the case law in the document did not exist, and the board withdrew the condition that month.","causal_attribution":"Counsel's sequence of events; the board refused to explain the withdrawal."},{"id":"c7","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"For almost two years, the conditions imposed by the Parole Board of Tasmania prevented Ms Neill-Fraser from speaking publicly about her claimed innocence","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"she had been unable to speak publicly after Tasmania's parole board placed a condition on her release in 2024.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"Any breach of parole could result in the remainder of the sentence having to be served","relation":"supports","source_id":"s6"}],"assertion":"The Human Rights Law Centre says the conditions prevented the parolee from speaking publicly about her claimed innocence for almost two years. The Guardian reports that a parole breach could have meant serving the remaining sentence.","causal_attribution":"The restriction is the effect of the condition; the AI document is one input to the decision that imposed it."},{"id":"c8","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"\"The Parole Board's professional standards will be independently investigated following its use of unverified artificial intelligence in a rationale document which formed part of the materials before the board to impose conditions,\"","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"Tasmania's Attorney-General announced an independent investigation of the Parole Board's professional standards following its use of unverified artificial intelligence in the rationale document.","causal_attribution":"The Attorney-General's statement acknowledges the AI use; it does not quantify its effect on the decision."},{"id":"c9","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"\"The Department will undertake a review to determine the extent to which Artificial Intelligence (AI) may have been used to inform past Tasmanian Parole Board decisions,\"","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"“The department will undertake a review to determine the extent to which artificial intelligence may have been used to inform past Tasmanian Parole Board decisions,” a justice department spokesperson said.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"Tasmania's Justice Department said it would review the extent to which AI may have been used to inform past Parole Board decisions.","causal_attribution":"Not a causal claim."}],"effects":[{"label":"a restriction on public speech about claimed innocence from December 2024 until withdrawal in August 2026","claim_id":"c7","direction":"negative"},{"label":"adverse parole decision affected by a rationale document citing likely AI-generated, non-existent case law","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-15/susan-neill-fraser-media-ban-parole-board-ai-hallucinations/106302950","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English in full from abc.net.au (HTTP 200). Court reporting of the 15 September 2026 hearing; the judgment and orders were not inspected. Retained complete body independently reinspected on 2026-10-06 for this proposal. No translation required.","independence_group":"abc-au"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/9350990/murderers-gag-order-lifted-after-troubling-ai-error/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English in full from canberratimes.com.au (HTTP 200); Australian Associated Press copy of the same hearing, reported independently of the ABC. Retained complete body independently reinspected on 2026-10-06 for this proposal. No translation required.","independence_group":"aap"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.hrlc.org.au/news/susan-neill-fraser-gag-order-unlawful/","kind":"organisation_statement","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English in full from hrlc.org.au (HTTP 200). Release by the organisation that represented the parolee; its account of the State's concessions is a party-side account. Retained complete body independently reinspected on 2026-10-06 for this proposal. No translation required.","independence_group":"hrlc"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-19/parole-board-ai-use-review-after-neill-fraser-case/107172064","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English in full from abc.net.au (HTTP 200). Same outlet as s1, so the same independence group; carries the Attorney-General's and Justice Department's statements. Retained complete body independently reinspected on 2026-10-06 for this proposal. No translation required.","independence_group":"abc-au"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/sep/19/tasmania-justice-department-review-ai-artificial-intelligence-fake-citation-murderer-parole-decision-ntwnfb","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English in full from theguardian.com (HTTP 200); credited to a staff reporter with Australian Associated Press, so grouped with s2. Retained complete body independently reinspected on 2026-10-06 for this proposal. No translation required.","independence_group":"aap"},{"id":"s6","url":"https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/sep/26/sue-neill-fraser-yacht-murder-ai-court-case-media-ban-tasmania-ntwnfb","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English in full from theguardian.com (HTTP 200); Guardian Australia feature by its own reporter. Retained complete body independently reinspected on 2026-10-06 for this proposal. No translation required.","independence_group":"guardian-au"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["justice"],"unknowns":["Which AI tool was used and the extent of its contribution to the rationale. Counsel identified the secretary as its preparer, but the document and generation history were not inspected.","Whether the rationale document informed the December 2024 decision, the May 2025 decision or both.","The text of the judgment or orders, which could not be read (AustLII HTTP 403).","The findings of the independent investigation and of the Justice Department's review of past parole decisions."],"geography":{"basis":"The Parole Board of Tasmania imposed the condition and the Supreme Court of Tasmania in Hobart set it aside (ABC, AAP). The parolee's country of residence is not stated as such in the sources read.","court_countries":["AU"],"event_countries":["AU"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"This is a concrete restriction of a person's speech through a human parole-board decision. Court reporting and the representative's account describe likely AI-generated false authorities used as an input to that decision. The relation is informed_decision_about and does not require the AI text to mention the parolee. The AI origin remains qualified, and the document's precise role in each of the two successive conditions is unknown. The court's reported grounds concern procedural fairness, unreasonableness and uncertainty.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-06"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The Human Rights Law Centre reports the State's concession that the board's decision-making was affected by a rationale document containing nonexistent authorities likely generated by AI. ABC and AAP court reports describe the document's use in imposing the media condition, and the Attorney-General's statement reported by ABC acknowledges unverified AI in material used by the board. These sources connect the AI-supplied legal material to a human decision restricting the parolee's speech. The relation is informed_decision_about. The sources do not establish that AI made claims about the parolee herself, wrote the whole rationale or made the final parole decision. The judgment and the rationale document have not been inspected.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["informed_decision_about"]},"name":"Tasmania parole media ban quashed after state conceded reliance on likely AI-hallucinated case law","summary":"In December 2024 the Parole Board of Tasmania added a condition to the parole of Susan Neill-Fraser, released in 2022 after serving 13 years for murder and who maintains her innocence, barring her from communicating with media to claim innocence or wrongful conviction; a broader condition replaced it in May 2025. On 15 September 2026 the Supreme Court of Tasmania declared the conditions invalid. Her counsel told the court that the board's secretary had used artificial intelligence to prepare a rationale document justifying the condition and that it cited case law that did not exist. The Human Rights Law Centre, which represented her, says the State conceded that the board's decision-making was affected by a document containing legal authorities that were likely AI-generated hallucinations, and the ABC reports the court found the board relied on that document. The board had withdrawn the condition in August 2026. Tasmania's Attorney-General announced an independent investigation of the board's professional standards over its use of unverified AI, and the Justice Department announced a review of AI use in past parole decisions.","incidentDate":"2024-12-01","incidentEndDate":"2026-09-15","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-09-15","aiSystem":"An unidentified artificial-intelligence tool that, according to counsel and the Attorney-General, was used to prepare a Parole Board rationale document citing case law that did not exist","aiProduct":"Unidentified AI writing tool","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["legal_harm","loss_of_autonomy"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The conditions restricted a parolee's public speech from December 2024 until their withdrawal in August 2026. They were declared invalid in September. The Human Rights Law Centre says the State conceded the board's decision-making had been affected by nonexistent legal authorities likely generated by AI. The judgment was not directly inspected, and the sources do not establish whether that document informed the original condition, the replacement or both.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One parolee is counted for the reported restriction of her speech. The reviewed sources describe no other identified person harmed by AI use in a parole decision; an announced review of past decisions does not establish additional victims.","victimAgeRange":"elderly","jurisdiction":"AU","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"investigation_opened","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-15/susan-neill-fraser-media-ban-parole-board-ai-hallucinations/106302950","primarySourceLabel":"ABC News, 15 September 2026: AI hallucinations in parole board submission scuttle media ban on Susan Neill-Fraser","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-06T04:48:51.9027+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-06T04:48:51.9027+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["parole","hallucinated-case-law","freedom-of-speech","judicial-review","government-ai-use"]},{"id":"2026-kimberlee-williams-maryland-facial-recognition-wrongful-arrest-six-months-jail","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"'Someone on the listserv ran the image through facial recognition technology and sent back Ms. Williams’ name and photo as a purported match to the suspect.'; 'the detective assigned to the case concealed that the entire basis of Ms. Williams purported identification was a lead from an unknown and unreliable face recognition technology search by an unknown entity.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'A respondent to the investigator’s CrimeDex bulletin “suggested, using facial recognition software” that Williams was the suspect, he told police.'; 'Each department charged Williams in 2020 based on the identification reported by the bank investigator and a visual comparison of Williams and the woman in the bank from photos, according to charging documents and incident reports.'; 'Montgomery County police did not disclose that Williams had been identified using facial recognition when they sought charges against her, according to police records.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"'The bank shared the result with detectives from three Maryland counties'; 'relying instead on only their own visual comparisons of photos of Ms. Williams and photos of the suspect.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"A bank investigator shared surveillance images of the fraud suspect on the CrimeDex network; a respondent used facial-recognition software to name Williams as a match; police in three Maryland counties charged her on the investigator's identification and their own visual comparison of photos, and the Montgomery County detective did not disclose the facial-recognition search when seeking charges.","causal_attribution":"The ACLU's account and the Washington Post's review of police records, charging documents and bank correspondence agree. The Post published on the day the ACLU sent its letters and does not say how it obtained the records; it attributes the expungement, the statute of limitations and the social-media alibi material to the ACLU. The Post adds that Montgomery and Anne Arundel police also cited her past check-fraud convictions; Anne Arundel police say they corroborate outside tips."},{"id":"c2","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"'On June 23, 2021, Ms. Williams was accompanying one of her daughters, a DoorDash driver'; 'Ms. Williams spent 23 days in an Oklahoma jail before a Maryland officer arrived'; 'Those cases were finally dismissed in December 2021. All told, Ms. Williams spent six months behind bars.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'and jailed for six months before the charges were dismissed, according to court records.'; 'Williams was held in jail in Oklahoma for about three weeks before being transported to Maryland.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Williams was arrested in June 2021 (on 23 June, according to the ACLU) at a military base near Lawton, Oklahoma, held about three weeks in Oklahoma, transported to Maryland, charged in three counties, and jailed about six months in total before the charges were dismissed.","causal_attribution":"ACLU and Washington Post (citing court records) independently."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'She faced 16 charges across the three counties, including 12 felonies.'; 'The two other counties dismissed their charges against Williams in December.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"'Montgomery County prosecutors dropped their charges against Ms. Williams in October 2021'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"She faced 16 charges across the three counties, including 12 felonies; Montgomery County dropped its charges in October 2021 and the other two counties dismissed theirs in December 2021.","causal_attribution":"Charge count from the Washington Post only; the October 2021 Montgomery dismissal and December 2021 dismissals are reported by both the ACLU and the Post."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'said her mother was depressed after leaving jail and struggled to readjust after the time behind bars.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"'this ordeal took a significant toll, with serious consequences for her mental and physical health to this day.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"After her release Williams was depressed and struggled to readjust, according to her daughter; the ACLU says the ordeal had serious consequences for her mental and physical health.","causal_attribution":"Family and advocate accounts; Williams herself told the Post she thinks illnesses caught in jail may have worsened a later condition, which is not established."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Today, the American Civil Liberties Union and ACLU of Maryland sent letters to three Maryland police departments on behalf of Kimberlee Williams'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'The Montgomery County Police Department declined to comment on the ACLU’s complaint, citing an active investigation.'; 'said the agency “investigates and corroborates any outside tips and leads it receives before applying for criminal charges.”'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"On 14 April 2026 the ACLU and ACLU of Maryland sent complaint letters to the Montgomery, Prince George's and Anne Arundel county police departments seeking an apology and reforms; Montgomery County police declined to comment citing an active investigation, and Anne Arundel police said they independently corroborate outside tips.","causal_attribution":"ACLU announcement and the departments' statements to the Banner."}],"effects":[{"label":"arrested in Oklahoma and jailed about six months in Oklahoma and Maryland on 16 bank-fraud charges, all later dismissed, after a facial-recognition search named her; depression and health effects reported","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/woman-wrongly-jailed-for-months-based-on-faulty-facial-recognition-technology-demands-apology-from-maryland-police-departments","kind":"press_release","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read live on 2026-09-27 (ACLU press release, 14 April 2026). The ACLU represents Williams.","independence_group":"aclu"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.aclu.org/cases/kimberlee-williams-wrongful-arrest","kind":"other","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read live on 2026-09-27 (ACLU case page). Same organisation as s1.","independence_group":"aclu"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2026/apr/14/that-wasnt-me-how-facial-recognition-led-to-a-woma/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read live on 2026-09-27: the Washington Post article (14 April 2026) as syndicated in full by the Spokesman-Review. The Post reviewed police and bank records, charging documents and interview video and interviewed Williams and her daughter. The washingtonpost.com original timed out (Archive 403).","independence_group":"washington-post"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://www.thebanner.com/community/criminal-justice/aclu-facial-recognition-maryland-police-YXUU7AXEMNFIHKHJ5FZB2RLJPA/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read live on 2026-09-27 (Baltimore Banner, April 2026). Mostly relays the ACLU; cited only for the departments' own responses to the Banner.","independence_group":"baltimore-banner"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use","institutional_use"],"contexts":["justice"],"unknowns":["Who ran the facial-recognition search on CrimeDex, with which software, and what the returned match contained.","How much weight each department gave the facial-recognition lead against their own photo comparisons and her prior convictions.","The exact release date in December 2021.","Whether the three departments have answered the ACLU complaints, and whether anyone else was charged.","Whether jail conditions contributed to her later illness (her own suggestion).","The dates of the frauds: the Washington Post gives December 2019 for the Potomac withdrawals but also quotes her daughter placing the Maryland cases in December 2020 and January 2021; the dates in the other two counties are not reported."],"geography":{"basis":"The frauds and charges were in Montgomery, Prince George's and Anne Arundel counties, Maryland; Williams lived in Oklahoma and was arrested at Fort Sill near Lawton, Oklahoma (ACLU; Washington Post).","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 search's identification of a person led to her arrest and about six months in jail: the ACLU and the Washington Post, which reviewed police records independently, agree on the facial-recognition lead, the charging and the dismissals. Williams is named in her own right; family members are not named.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-27"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The bank investigator told Montgomery County police that a CrimeDex respondent 'suggested, using facial recognition software' that Williams was the suspect (Washington Post, from police records), and the ACLU says someone on the listserv ran the image through facial-recognition technology and returned her name and photo. The software, its operator and the match output were not produced; police also made their own photo comparisons, and two departments cited her old convictions. The made_claim_about relation reflects the search's identification of her as the suspect.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"Maryland/Oklahoma: Kimberlee Williams, an Oklahoma woman who says she had never been to Maryland, was arrested in June 2021 and jailed about six months on bank-fraud charges in three Maryland counties after a facial-recognition search by an unknown CrimeDex respondent named her; all charges were dismissed by December 2021 and the ACLU filed complaints in April 2026","summary":"According to police and bank records reviewed by the Washington Post, in December 2019 a woman made fraudulent withdrawals at a SunTrust branch in Potomac, Maryland; branches in two other Maryland counties were also defrauded. A bank investigator posted the surveillance photos on CrimeDex, an online network of police and corporate investigators; an unknown respondent ran the image through facial-recognition software and returned Kimberlee Williams's name and photo, and the investigator told Montgomery County police that facial-recognition software had identified her. Police in Montgomery, Prince George's and Anne Arundel counties charged her in 2020 on the investigator's identification and their own visual comparison of photos (two departments also cited her old Oklahoma check-fraud convictions), without reported checks of her whereabouts; Montgomery County police did not disclose the facial-recognition search in the charging application, according to police records reviewed by the Washington Post and the ACLU. On 23 June 2021 she was arrested at the gate of Fort Sill near Lawton, Oklahoma, while accompanying her daughter on a DoorDash delivery, spent about three weeks in an Oklahoma jail, was flown to Maryland, and faced 16 charges including 12 felonies. The counties dismissed the charges one after another, in October and December 2021, after about six months in jail. Her daughter says she was depressed afterwards; the ACLU says the ordeal harmed her mental and physical health. On 14 April 2026 the ACLU and ACLU of Maryland sent complaint letters to the three departments seeking an apology and reforms.","incidentDate":"2021-06-23","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-04-14","aiSystem":"An unidentified facial-recognition search run by an unknown respondent on the CrimeDex investigators' network against a bank's surveillance image (ACLU; Washington Post); the software and operator are not identified","aiProduct":"Unidentified facial recognition system","severity":"high","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["loss_of_liberty","legal_harm","psychological_distress"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Williams spent about six months in jails in Oklahoma and Maryland on 16 charges that were all dismissed; the ACLU and the Washington Post attribute the arrest to a facial-recognition match that police relied on without independent investigation, and her daughter says she was depressed afterwards (ACLU; Washington Post via Spokesman-Review).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person arrested and jailed, Kimberlee Williams (ACLU; Washington Post). Family members' distress is described but not counted. Exact 1.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US-MD","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"media_coverage","outcomeStatus":"pending","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2026/apr/14/that-wasnt-me-how-facial-recognition-led-to-a-woma/","primarySourceLabel":"Washington Post via the Spokesman-Review, 14 April 2026: 'That wasn't me': How facial recognition led to a woman being jailed for 6 months","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-27T03:39:40.380472+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:43.031229+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["facial-recognition","wrongful-arrest","police","crimedex","maryland","oklahoma","aclu","justice","made-claim-about"]}]}