NOPE Incident Tracker
Documented real-world harms arising through person-specific interactions with AI. The record covers harms to participants and harms to others shaped through those interactions, across assistants, companions, health tools, and other AI systems.
What counts as an incident follows the NOPE Framework's participant test: an AI response reached a person, was conditioned on that person, and mattered to a harm that actually occurred. Full inclusion criteria.
90 incidents reported since 2016
152
Directly Affected
30
Lawsuits
7
Regulatory
24
Affecting Minors
Timeline
3 of 90 incidents
Acton Double Homicide (Arjun Aravind ChatGPT Family-Killing Stories)
A 17-year-old in Acton, Massachusetts was charged with murdering his mother and 14-year-old brother. Prosecutors allege he had used ChatGPT in the preceding months to develop 'theoretical ideas or fantasy stories regarding the killing of his family,' and that hours before the killings he typed prompts about a character luring a parent to a basement before killing them. His mother was found dead in the basement.
Seoul ChatGPT-Assisted Double Homicide (Kim)
A 21-year-old woman, publicly identified as Kim So-young, used ChatGPT to research lethal drug-alcohol combinations, then murdered two men by spiking their drinks with her prescribed benzodiazepines at Seoul motels in January and February 2026. ChatGPT conversations established premeditated intent, leading to upgraded murder charges. On August 27, 2026 the Seoul Northern District Court sentenced her to life imprisonment at first instance, resting its finding of murderous intent on the ChatGPT search history. Both she and the prosecution have appealed.
Adams v. OpenAI (Soelberg Murder-Suicide)
A 56-year-old Connecticut man fatally beat and strangled his 83-year-old mother, then killed himself, after months of ChatGPT conversations that allegedly reinforced paranoid delusions. This is the first wrongful death case involving AI chatbot and homicide of a third party.
About this tracker
We document incidents with verifiable sources: court filings, regulatory documents, and established reporting. New public entries must be verified or credible. Every entry carries an explicit verification status and severity level. Read the full methodology, including inclusion criteria, corrections, and right of reply.
Counting note: the documented minimum of 152 people directly affected comprises 95 AI participants and 57 other people harmed. 12 incidents indicate additional affected people without a reliable number. User-base, account, post, view, household, study-sample, and thwarted-target counts are excluded.
Have documentation of an incident we should include? Contact us.
Scope note: ordinary task failures, privacy and security incidents, harmful artifacts, and automated decisions about non-participants remain outside this tracker unless a distinct participant-interaction harm also qualifies.
If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.
Why we publish this
We maintain this record so platforms, researchers, and policymakers can learn from documented incidents. That includes platforms that never work with us. The full dataset is free to cite and export (CC BY 4.0).