What just happened? Another incident has taken place that illustrates the need to be careful what you tell AI. A Florida woman is facing felony charges after she used Claude as a diary and allegedly wrote that she planned to “shoot up” the Sheriff’s office. After a human reviewer examined the statements, they were reported to police.
According to the arrest report, Carli Michelle Heller, of Bonita Springs, Florida, wrote on September 26 that she would attack the Sheriff’s office. She later said that she uses Anthropic’s chatbot like a “diary.”
Claude’s safety systems flagged the entry and it was escalated to a human reviewer. After deciding it was a credible threat, the reviewer reported it to law enforcement.
The company says it may share user information in limited emergencies if it believes disclosure is necessary to prevent death or serious physical injury.
Deputies identified Heller and visited her home. She was detained without incident before an LCSO intelligence detective took over the investigation.
Heller faces a charge of making a written threat of violence under Florida law. Florida Statute 836.10 makes it a second-degree felony to send, post, or transmit a written or electronic record threatening to kill or injure someone, carry out a mass shooting, or commit an act of terrorism. The communication must be made in a manner in which another person may view it.
Anthropic isn’t going to be taking any chances when it comes to anything it deems a potential threat. Last month, it was reported that OpenAI and Sam Altman are being sued by British Columbia over claims that the company could have prevented a mass shooting in the Canadian province.
The shooter, eighteen-year-old former pupil Jesse Van Rootselaar, had previously been flagged by OpenAI’s safety team for her conversations about gun violence, but OpenAI never alerted police because the conversations did not meet the threshold for legal referral.
In June, Florida also sued OpenAI and Altman, alleging that ChatGPT had contributed to real-world harms, including the 2025 Florida State University shooting.
The latest incident is another reminder to think before you enter something into a chatbot that could get you into trouble. It’s certainly not a private diary whose contents are for your eyes only.
Reports last month revealed that human contractors reviewing Microsoft Copilot’s image editor can see users’ prompts, uploaded photos and AI-generated edits. Documents show that some of those assignments contain sexual, disturbing or potentially illegal material, though the reviewers are not there to flag the content – only to assess whether the output is accurate.
doesnt seem like the right charge. not sure she should be charged with anything though. seems like she should get some help and make sure she isnt gonna shoot nothing up and maybe get some learning on how computer shit works, but if this doesnt make her curious then nothing probably will.
a bigger issue is that many if not most devices are headed to having everything ai integrated so even if she diaried in a notepad file it would get scanned and reported.
The problem is that America’s answer to every problem in society is jail. You guys gotta come up with more than “arrest bad guys”.
Yeah, I know someone frustrated with their local council who privately says “I’m going to 💥 the council” as a joke. That’s very different to sending a threatening letter to the council itself. Or harassing them.
The example here feels closer to the former than the latter.
slavers need more bodies
We say this, but every time there’s a mass shooting people go “Why couldn’t this have been prevented?!?”
Like pick one or the other, but let’s stop asking for predictive policing in one breath, and in the next one asking why someone saying she’s going to shoot up a place is being taken seriously and punished.
If she had said the same thing to a psychotherapist, even they would have been obligated to report it. It’s really not surprising.
Sure, get her mental health treatment, and have a professional assess her for threat level. But go ahead and blacklist her from purchasing firearms, and if she already owns any then put them in some kind of stewardship where she can’t access them for a set time period, and after that can only check them out with supervision for specific reasons like “going to the firing range” or “hunting.”
Not saying she should be convicted of a felony, just that it’s not surprising that this would be reported to the authorities.
And I’m against tech surveillance, but it’s not like this conversation was done locally on her device. She transmitted her messages over the internet to a server in a data center where it was processed. Did Anthropic make any promises that messages were kept encrypted in a no-access vault where even human reviewers couldn’t access them? Cause I don’t think they did…