Florida’s attorney general, James Uthmeier, announced Thursday that his office planned to investigate OpenAI over the alleged role of ChatGPT in a deadly shooting last year.

In April 2025, a gunman opened fire on Florida State University’s campus, killing two and injuring five.

Last week, attorneys for one of the victims of the shooting claimed that ChatGPT had been used to plan the attack. The family of the victim has said that they plan to sue OpenAI over the incident.

“AI should advance mankind, not destroy it,” Uthmeier said in a statement posted to X.

“We’re demanding answers on OpenAI’s activities that have hurt kids, endangered Americans, and facilitated the recent FSU mass shooting. Wrongdoers must be held accountable.

” Uthmeier added in a video that subpoenas were “forthcoming” as part of the probe.

ChatGPT has been linked to a growing number of deaths and violent incidents — including murders, suicides, and shootings — and has added to worries over the advent of what psychologists call “AI psychosis,” delusions that are reinforced, encouraged, or deepened by communications with chatbots.

For example, Stein-Erik Soelberg, a man with a history of mental health issues, had regularly communicated with ChatGPT before he killed his mother and then himself last year, according to a Wall Street Journal investigation.

The chatbot frequently seemed to reinforce the paranoid thoughts that consumed him in the lead-up to the murder-suicide. When reached for comment by TechCrunch, an OpenAI spokesperson provided the following statement: “Each week, more than 900 million people use ChatGPT to improve their daily lives through uses such as learning new skills or navigating complex healthcare systems. Our ongoing safety work continues to play an important role in delivering these benefits to everyday people, as well as supporting scientific research and discovery. We build ChatGPT to understand people’s intent and respond in a safe and appropriate way, and we continue improving our technology. We will cooperate with the Attorney General’s investigation

Highlighted sentences link to their corresponding claims. Click any highlighted sentence to jump to its detailed analysis.
Highlight Colors Indicate Claim Quality:
✓ Healthy Claim - No fallacies or contradictions detected
⚠️ Minor Issues - Has contradictions or minor fallacies
🚨 Serious Issues - Multiple contradictions or severe fallacies
Quality Criteria: Claims are evaluated for logical fallacies and contradictions with other news sources. Green highlights indicate healthy claims suitable for reference.
Source