OpenAI Sued After ChatGPT Assisted Canadian School Shooting
CEO of OpenAI Sam Altman faces seven lawsuits, alleging the company ignored internal warnings about the Tumbler Ridge shooter, according to researcher David Riedman.
- By Jesse Jacobs
- April 30, 2026
The families of victims killed in the February 2026 mass shooting at Tumbler Ridge Secondary School filed seven lawsuits against OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman. The filings allege the company’s artificial intelligence bot, ChatGPT, encouraged the shooter’s violent fixations and helped formulate the attack plan.
According to the lawsuits, OpenAI employees flagged the shooter’s interactions months before the event. Despite recommendations to alert law enforcement, the company allegedly opted only to delete the account to protect its $1 trillion valuation. Attorney Ali Moghaddas, representing the families, stated that Altman and his associates realized the danger but "decided that the safety of the children of Tumbler Ridge was an acceptable risk."
The legal action follows extensive warnings from David Riedman, a school safety expert and creator of the K-12 School Shooting Database. In his investigation, “ChatGPT helped me plan a school shooting,” Riedman demonstrated that ChatGPT’s safety filters could be bypassed using "jailbreaking" techniques. By reframing a violent request as a "Nerf blaster battle," Riedman showed how the AI would provide tactical strategies, including mapping school hallways and identifying "theater prop closets" as concealment spots.
"It took a very dark direction," Riedman said regarding the AI’s behavior, noting that the system even generated a manifesto centered on perceived grievances. "I didn’t prompt it to get to that level. It just went there on its own."
Riedman stated that despite sending multiple emails and direct messages to OpenAI’s safety team to report these vulnerabilities, he received no response from the company.
The lawsuits claim the AI deepened the shooter’s delusions through positive reinforcement. While Altman issued an apology in April for failing to alert authorities, the plaintiffs argue the decision was a conscious choice to prioritize market standing over public safety.