AI gone too far? US husband claims ChatGPT helped wife plan his poisoning

Tech Justice Law and Normand, Judkins & Couch have filed a lawsuit in San Francisco County Superior Court against OpenAI on behalf of James Gates, who survived a murder attempt by his wife, Cheryl Gates.

As per a statement released by Tech Justice Law, the man was targeted after ChatGPT fueled her delusions about him and crafted a personalized plan to help her poison him.

The complaint details how Cheryl started treating ChatGPT as a trusted confidant, and how her reliance on the product increasingly dominated and influenced her life until it reached a catastrophic level when the AI bot encouraged and helped her plan her husband’s murder.

Rather than intervening as Cheryl shared her most dangerous fears, frustrations, and plans, the product became an echo chamber, amplifier and, eventually, a co-conspirator in her murder attempt, the statement said.

Eventually, Cheryl’s conversations with the chatbot turned to concrete planning on how to poison her husband and get away with it, including how to combine drugs in their home to make death faster and harder to detect, and how to destroy the evidence. 

“My wife didn’t fit the mold of a ‘vulnerable’ user, but she was vulnerable nonetheless. We all are at some point. She took her grievances about our marriage to ChatGPT and months of engagement drove her farther and farther from herself – and from reality. She became someone I no longer recognized. And I became someone she wanted dead. For almost a year, I couldn’t make sense of her actions. Then I read her chat logs. She didn’t act alone.” said James Gates.

This case seeks to hold the company accountable for designing, marketing and distributing a product programmed to prioritize engagement over safety — and the resulting harm not only for the user, but also the people around them. The chatbot validated and prolonged conversations no matter how dangerous they became.

“These products are programmed to exploit our emotions and impulses to keep us engaged. The worst possible risk – encouraging and aiding an attempted murder – is on full display in this case.” said Meetali Jain, Litigation Counsel with Tech Justice Law.

“Macro-level AI harm is dominating the news cycle right now, but James’s case brings that down to the individual level, showing the harm to an ordinary family when safety is an afterthought and profits are placed over people.” said Christoper Hudon, Of Counsel with Normand, Judkins and Couch.