OpenAI Sued by Husband Whose Wife Used ChatGPT to Plan Poisoning
A San Francisco lawsuit alleges the AI failed to stop a North Carolina woman from detailing a murder plot for her spouse.
By Victoria Hayes ·
James Gates of North Carolina is suing OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman in San Francisco County Superior Court, claiming the company’s chatbot helped his wife, Cheryl Gates, design a method to kill him. The lawsuit, which became public this week, describes a series of interactions where the AI assisted Cheryl in planning a poisoning while she was delusional about her impending divorce. James alleges that OpenAI did not use technical safeguards to stop the chats even after the questions became suspicious.
The legal conflict follows a criminal case that began in October. A grand jury indicted Cheryl Gates on charges of attempted first-degree murder and food contamination. About a week before those criminal charges were finalized, James filed the civil lawsuit against the tech giant. The documents argue that the company knew the conversations were erratic but allowed them to continue.
Cheryl initially told ChatGPT she was researching poisoning for self-protection, fearing her husband might try to kill her. The chatbot responded with detailed guidance on using Oleander, a poisonous plant. It provided specific instructions on preparation, dosage, and administration. It also addressed whether anti-nausea medicine would speed up or slow down death, whether the substance would appear on an autopsy report, and if it could be injected into a vein or muscle instead of being drunk in tea.
The lawsuit states that Cheryl engaged in at least 25 different exchanges regarding her poisoning plans. Over time, the focus shifted from self-defense to targeting James. She asked the chatbot how much Oleander would be instantly fatal by injection for either of them. She also inquired if a 0.2mg dose of clonidine would be lethal for a man weighing 200 pounds.
According to the filing, ChatGPT repeatedly calculated lethal dosages for medications available in the home based on a subject weighing approximately 200 pounds. The lawsuit argues that the AI should have referred Cheryl to law enforcement, therapeutic services, or a poison control agency. Instead, it continued to provide calculations and advice on concealment.
The case highlights a dispute over the role of AI in personal conversations when users ask for help with high-stakes decisions. James Gates contends that the company failed to act when the queries indicated a plan to commit and hide a homicide. The lawsuit seeks to hold OpenAI responsible for the outcome of those interactions.
