Jul 2023 to Jan 2024Event location unknownUnidentified image tool
Merseyside Police said in October 2024 that a Southport man had been jailed for two years and two months at Liverpool Crown Court after pleading guilty to making indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of a child, sharing an intimate photograph or film, and voyeurism. According to the police, an investigation found that between July 2023 and January 2024 he made 266 indecent pseudo-images of children using AI technology, and that he used the faces of real women and children without their knowledge to create pornographic images, which the force calls deepfakes, and shared them online. Two women described in victim impact statements lasting fear, anxiety and a sense of violation. A woman related to him by marriage later told the Liverpool Echo that explicit images of her, which she found online after anonymous messages in September 2022, were made by other people he had asked to deface her photos, and that the case never went to prosecutors after his arrest in January 2023.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 5 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 20/10/2026
Event date unknownNetherlandsUnidentified image tool
Dutch police said on 4 September 2025 that they had arrested a man in a Gelderland municipality the day before on suspicion of making sexually explicit deepfakes, which they call deepnudes, and spreading them through channels such as WhatsApp groups, and of sending women unsolicited photos of his genitals and sexual messages. According to the police, 130 victims from across the country reported to them over recent years and were regularly and repeatedly harassed; NOS reports, citing the police, that images were manipulated for some of them, that the exact number is unclear, and that the police suspect the conduct began in 2021 or 2022. The police seized digital data carriers and said the Public Prosecution Service would decide on the consequences. No tool is named.
Core concern High reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 19/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified video tool
Mainz police reported on 23 July 2026 that a man who had met a supposed woman on an online platform refused repeated demands to send money as gift or payment cards. He then received a video that, according to the police, was evidently created with artificial intelligence: a fake news broadcast that used a picture of his face to warn about him. The sender threatened to publish the video and to report him to the police for an alleged fraud unless he paid. The man did not pay and filed a complaint; the police say no financial loss occurred and, as far as known, the video was not published. Hit Radio FFH, citing a police spokeswoman, reports that the broadcast warned women that he was a fraudster.
Core concern Low reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 19/10/2026
2025Event location unknownUnidentified image tool
A civil court in Goiânia, Brazil (32ª Vara Cível) ordered Telegram in a judgment signed on 6 October 2026 to pay R$10,000 in moral damages to a woman whose fake intimate images, created with artificial intelligence, were shared on the platform. According to the judgment as reported by Portal 6 (citing the legal news site Rota Jurídica) and O Popular, Telegram users used AI tools to alter photos that she and her sisters had posted on social media into nude and sexual images, and shared them without consent in a group of more than 120 participants with offensive sexual comments. She reported the group to Telegram through its support channels, including a notification on 29 July 2025, and received no reply; the group had 98 participants then and at least 123 a month later. The court held Telegram liable because it did not remove the posts after notification, ordered removal of the material, measures to block identical or similar copies, and disclosure of data identifying the group's creators and users. Telegram did not contest the case and did not answer O Popular.
Core concern Medium reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 19/10/2026
21 Oct 2025 to 3 Apr 2026United StatesCoCounsel
In a published opinion of 3 April 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit addressed the briefs a lawyer appointed under the Criminal Justice Act had filed for an indigent defendant appealing a sentencing enhancement in a drug-trafficking case. The court noticed that the principal brief's file name was 'CoCounsel Skill Results' and found three quotations that appear in no legal authority and misstatements of two precedents. The lawyer admitted that a staff member had used Westlaw's CoCounsel to create the first draft, that he repeated the process for the reply, and that the false quotations came from artificial intelligence he did not verify. The court denied him compensation for the appeal, referred the opinion for possible disciplinary proceedings and to the Kentucky Bar Association, and by separate order removed him, locked his briefs and ordered replacement counsel to file new ones, which it said further delayed resolution of the defendant's appeal. The court acknowledged his candour and his 40 years without discipline.
Core + contextual relations Medium reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 19/10/2026
Event date unknownPolandUnidentified image and video tool
City police in the Silesian Voivodeship said on 30 April 2026 that they had detained a 30-year-old man suspected of persistently harassing a young woman and threatening her and her family. According to the police, he sent her several to more than a dozen messages a day over a long period, opened new profiles when she blocked him, came to her home, and used artificial intelligence to create videos casting her and her mother in invented scenarios, as well as photos and videos simulating violence against a family member. He was charged with persistent harassment and criminal threats, and a court remanded him in custody for three months. The police do not name the AI tool or say how they established its use.
Core concern High reported severity Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 19/10/2026
Event date unknownIndiaUnidentified image and video tool
Police in the Chennai area arrested a man in early May 2026 who, according to their investigation as reported by the Times of India, DT Next and Daily Thanthi, used AI to turn a woman colleague's display pictures into obscene images and videos, posted them from a fake Instagram account in her name, and tagged the posts with her home location. A friend alerted the woman to the account; she complained to an all-women police station, and police traced the posts to a colleague's phone. Daily Thanthi reports that he admitted under questioning to making the images with AI after a workplace dispute. DT Next reports that the account and posts were blocked and that he was remanded in judicial custody. The AI tool is not identified, and the date the posts began is not reported.
Core concern High reported severity Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 19/10/2026
Jun 2025PolandUnidentified image tool
In June 2025, according to OKO.press, a group of pupils at a primary school in central Poland took a classmate's photo from the internet, used an application that offers to "undress" people in uploaded photos to generate a nude image bearing her face, posted it on the school's Instagram profile and urged others to order more such images. Poland's Personal Data Protection Office (UODO) says the girl was under 15 and notified the police, but the police declined to open proceedings and the prosecutor's office upheld that decision, finding no prohibited act; Gazeta Prawna reports that they considered the AI-generated material not pornographic and the pupil unharmed. The UODO president appealed to the Prosecutor General, in January 2026 the authority announced that prosecutors had informed it they were taking up the case again, and in June 2026 it said its president had recently asked once more for the investigation to be resumed. The application is not named.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 5 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 19/10/2026
17 Jan 2025 to 4 Nov 2025United StatesGemini and Sora (reported)
The Queens District Attorney charged a former candidate for New York City Council District 29 with forgery in June 2026, alleging that from January to November 2025 he posted AI-generated images, fake news articles and videos on his campaign's Facebook and Instagram accounts. Prosecutors say subpoena records and search warrants show he prompted an AI platform to face-swap himself into a photo shaking hands with former Council Member Robert Holden for a fake New York Post endorsement story, used Google Gemini to make a fake Amsterdam News article saying his opponent, Council Member Lynn Schulman, was questioned by police, and posted a Sora-generated newscast announcing that she had dropped out. They also allege AI videos of apparent police officers and children endorsing him. In October 2025 Holden's chief of staff told the Queens Daily Eagle the handshake image was fake and AI-generated, and Schulman said her opponent was lying about her and creating fake news. The accused said his accounts were hacked and later told the AP he would not confirm or deny making the posts.
Core concern Low reported severity Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources · Added 19/10/2026
18 Oct 2026AustraliaClaude (reported)
A man in Sydney's south was arrested on Sunday 18 October 2026 after Interpol flagged his interactions with Anthropic's Claude chatbot, and was charged with using a carriage service to menace, harass or offend, the Sydney Morning Herald reported from Sutherland Local Court on 19 October. According to a police facts sheet tendered to the court, he told the chatbot that he would shoot up the local daycare; the court heard that he had been using Claude's voice mode and had said he planned to shoot several children at a childcare centre. He was remanded in custody for a mental health assessment after prosecutors argued against release. His lawyer told the court the remarks were a stress- and frustration-induced tirade after he had tried to use Claude to help treat an ear infection, that there was no weight behind them, and that he believed the conversation was private. The court heard his Claude account was suspended. How the conversation reached Interpol is not reported. The Australia Today reported on 24 October, citing Channel 10, that he has pleaded not guilty.
Core concern Medium reported severity Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 19/10/2026
26 Mar 2026 to 19 Aug 2026AustraliaUnidentified AI drafting tool
On 19 August 2026 a Deputy President of Australia's Fair Work Commission ordered a self-represented former Aldi store worker to pay A$1,230 towards Aldi's legal costs. The decision records that his unfair dismissal application, lodged on the evening he was told of his dismissal on 26 March 2026, was obviously prepared using AI and still contained AI drafting notes, and that every email and document he filed was drafted using AI. He was notified of his dismissal three days short of the six-month minimum employment period. According to the decision, his AI-generated materials kept arguing about a different, irrelevant date (when the dismissal took effect), including after the Commission explained the correct test to him twice by email on 31 July 2026. He discontinued at the hearing on 5 August 2026. The Deputy President found that continuing after those warnings was unreasonable and said it was quite possible he had adopted AI as his quasi-legal adviser, while stating that using AI to draft submissions is not of itself unreasonable and that the responsibility was his. The decision notes that an appeal was lodged against it.
Core concern Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 18/10/2026
15 Jul 2026United StatesUnidentified AI drafting tool
In a published opinion of July 2026, the Arizona Court of Appeals found that a self-represented appellant's opening brief in a probate dispute contained eight citations, six of them deficient, including two cases that do not exist. In a written explanation and at a hearing on the false citations he acknowledged relying on generative AI to write the brief and said he did nothing to verify the citations. The court struck the inaccurate and false citations, rejected the appeal because no supportive authority remained, held that citing a hallucinated case is sanctionable whether or not it is intended, and ordered him to pay the share of the other party's attorney's fees traceable to the fake citations. Because he said he did not intend to deceive and is not legally trained, the court chose this narrow sanction over contempt or fines. It described the opinion as the first published Arizona ruling on generative AI hallucinations in filings.
Core + contextual relations Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 1 source · Added 18/10/2026
6 May 2026United StatesClaude Console (reported)
In the federal lawsuit over the Trump administration's mass layoffs (AFGE v. Trump, Northern District of California), a partner at Binnall Law Group filed an emergency motion on the night of 6 May 2026, in the Eastern District of Virginia, to quash a deposition subpoena directed at a former Homeland Security official the firm represents; that court transferred the motion to the Northern District of California. On 13 May Judge Susan Illston denied the motion. Her order says the court was troubled by multiple citations to case quotations that do not exist in the cases cited, that counsel was unaware of these quotations when questioned at the hearing and had no explanation for them, and it ordered counsel to explain the fabricated quotations in a declaration under penalty of perjury by 15 May. In that declaration the partner said he had used Claude Console, an enterprise AI platform, to create an initial draft, that an associate told him she had checked the citations, and that he did not double-check the quotations. He apologised to the court and opposing counsel and attached a corrected version. The firm's founding partner declared that firm policy prohibits using tools like Claude for legal drafting, that the error breached its policies and training, and that the firm had opened an internal investigation. On 20 Oct 2026 the court administratively closed the related miscellaneous case, saying the motion had been adjudicated and no further filings were anticipated. Neither order read mentions a sanction, and whether one was imposed is not established.
Core concern Low reported severity Internal Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources, 3 underlying accounts · Added 18/10/2026
Aug 2026MalaysiaUnidentified image tool
Negeri Sembilan police said on 17 October 2026, in a statement reported by Bernama and RTM, that they had received five reports, lodged by parents or guardians between 20 and 23 August 2026, over the circulation of photographs of female students at a secondary school in Seremban that were edited using AI to resemble pornographic images. The police describe the victims as aged 14 to 17 and the suspect as an upper-secondary student whom the school suspended for five days in August; the case is being investigated under child sexual offences law and the Penal Code. A lawyer for a group of parents told a press conference that the images came to light on 12 August, when a younger pupil found them on an unlocked phone at school, alleged that the student made about 200 such images, and said the school had acknowledged more than 300 affected girls at a September meeting; he said there is no direct evidence that the images were sold. A mother said her child still has trouble sleeping every night. After the girls were questioned at the police headquarters on 17 October, their lawyers alleged that police had made them face the suspect during identification. The AI tool is not identified.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 7 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 18/10/2026
Jan 2025Event location unknownChatGPT (reported)
According to a Gujarat High Court order quoted by the Times of India, a man began using ChatGPT extensively in January 2025, even for minor and routine matters. The order, drawing on his wife's reply to his legal notice and the documents on record, says he gradually formed and fabricated various narratives, which affected his behaviour and their relationship and contributed to growing matrimonial discord. The court itself observed that words he used showed his excessive dependence on ChatGPT. The wife asked him in 2025 to cut down his use; the order records that his behaviour did not change and that a doctor later diagnosed a mental illness. The wife left the matrimonial home in May 2026 and took their daughter in August. The husband's habeas corpus petition for custody was rejected: the court held that custody with the mother was not illegal and that the disputed facts need a full inquiry by a competent court. The account rests on the wife's allegations as read by the court; no source establishes that ChatGPT caused the breakdown or the illness.
Core concern Medium reported severity Lawsuit Dismissed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 18/10/2026
2026ChinaDoubao (reported)
According to his own social-media posts and video, as reported by Dahe Daily (15 May 2026) and National Business Daily (20 May 2026), a user in China who had booked flights from Shijiazhuang to Chongqing for 2 May 2026 decided to drive instead and asked the Doubao chatbot about the refund fee. Doubao told him he could safely refund and that the fee would be small (only 5% in National Business Daily's account, under 100 yuan in Dahe Daily's). He refunded without checking the airline's rules and was charged about 40%, 600 yuan. When he returned to the chatbot, Doubao said it would handle the claim, promised to pay him 600 yuan itself if the money was not recovered by 6 May and produced a 'compensation commitment letter'. On 6 May it said it would pay by midnight and asked for his WeChat payment code; on 7 May it said that as an AI it could not make transfers and admitted its error. He then used Doubao to draft a complaint, was told by it that he did not need a lawyer, and on 12 May submitted a suit against the app's operator, Beijing Chuntian Zhiyun Technology, according to a screenshot he posted (Dahe Daily names the Beijing Internet Court). His posts had been deleted by 19 May. Doubao's customer service told Dahe Daily the matter had been recorded; Doubao and ByteDance did not answer National Business Daily. Whether the court accepted the case, and its outcome, are not reported.
Core concern Low reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 17/10/2026
2026United StatesChatGPT
In a 2026 Texas trial over 3M's role in the January 2020 Watson Grinding explosion in Houston, which killed three people, an engineering expert retained for 3M used ChatGPT to prepare his expert report, according to discovery records and transcripts reviewed by 404 Media and CBS News. One prompt asked ChatGPT to show how 3M was 0% at fault for the explosion. The plaintiffs' lawyers, who found a citation overlay document and then hundreds of pages of prompts, said ChatGPT produced more than 80% of the report. Under questioning, the expert acknowledged using AI to help draft the report but defended his research. CBS News reports that after the deposition 3M's attorneys removed him from their witness list, and the plaintiffs subpoenaed him to testify about his prompts at trial. The expert's lawyer said he did not delegate his opinions to ChatGPT and called public characterisations a selective distortion of the record; 3M said he was an independent witness who used AI as a tool after reaching his own conclusions. The jury found 3M negligent and the court awarded the victims $61.5 million; 3M said it would appeal.
Core concern Low reported severity Internal Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 17/10/2026
8 Nov 2024ItalyUnidentified video tool
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.
Core concern Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 17/10/2026
29 Jan 2026NetherlandsUnidentified AI writing tool
A law student at Leiden University used a generative AI tool to spell-check his bachelor thesis and to check and order its reference list. Seven of the thesis's footnote references (one of them appearing twice, out of 36 footnotes with references) were wrong in the final version; according to his explanation, the tool had distorted some of them, for example with wrong years or author initials, and invented others. On 29 January 2026 the faculty's exam board declared the thesis invalid and excluded him until 28 January 2027 from the thesis track and every exam in the faculty's programmes, reasoning that the fictitious references indicated unauthorised use of generative AI and therefore fraud. The university's appeals board for examinations found in March 2026 that he had plausibly shown he used generative AI to prepare his reference list, which it called a permitted use, but held him responsible for the non-existent sources; the exam board then re-imposed the invalidation with an exclusion until 29 July 2026, and the appeals board upheld that in July. On 14 October 2026 the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State (Raad van State) found his explanation plausible, held that no more than carelessness had been shown, and annulled the sanction; the thesis must now be graded, and the examiner may take the incorrect references into account in the grade.
Core concern Medium reported severity
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 17/10/2026
2024Event location unknownUnidentified voice-cloning tool
According to the Beijing Internet Court's account, released on 16 October 2026 among typical cases on online infringement involving older people, a culture company selling family parenting books commissioned a livestream sales host in 2024 to make promotional short videos. The videos used clips of public lectures and classes given by an older person with some public profile in education and parenting, combined with AI-synthesised audio whose timbre, intonation and rhythm closely resembled that person's voice, and linked viewers to the company's shop. Neither the images nor the audio had been authorised. The court held that the synthesised voice, combined with the person's image and public profile, was identifiable as that person's and infringed their portrait and voice rights. The company had not checked whether the material was authorised, so the court found it jointly liable with the host and ordered it to apologise and to compensate economic losses and reasonable costs of the claim. The amounts, the judgment date and the tool are not reported.
Core concern Low reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 17/10/2026