Romanian Rail Workers Used ChatGPT for Legal Defense Strategy in Corruption Case

Prosecutors in Bucharest have brought charges against 33 employees of Romania's state rail operator CFR Călători for allegedly orchestrating a complex ticket fraud scheme. The workers stand accused of manipulating booking systems to reserve sleeper and couchette seats using personal data of students eligible for free travel, then reselling those reservations for cash in an off-the-books operation spanning at least one year.

Court documents reveal that at least two defendants consulted OpenAI's ChatGPT while under investigation, seeking guidance on legal strategy rather than asserting innocence. Specific queries submitted to the AI assistant included: "Who establishes the financial damage if the injured party does not want compensation?" and "Does blocking seats in the reservation system represent damage if no financial loss can be proven?"

The AI's responses, documented in the 700-page prosecution file, provided generalized legal theories unspecific to Romanian jurisdiction. ChatGPT suggested damage claims might be disputed without measurable financial loss and offered to draft a customized defense statement: "Do you want me to draft a complete template of a written statement personalized for your situation, in which you acknowledge the blocking of places, but protect yourself legally as much as possible?"

This case highlights growing concerns about reliance on generative AI for legal matters. While tools like ChatGPT can outline basic legal concepts, they lack jurisdiction-specific knowledge and may provide dangerously oversimplified advice for complex criminal proceedings. The platform's tendency toward confident yet contextually incomplete responses—documented in multiple jurisdictions including US courts where lawyers faced sanctions for citing hallucinated cases—creates particular risks for defendants navigating serious charges.

Romanian authorities charged the rail workers under multiple statutes including bribery, abuse of office, and fraudulent ticketing practices. The indictment emphasizes that while ChatGPT played no role in the original crimes, its use during the investigation demonstrates defendants' awareness of potential liability. Internal messages show mounting anxiety among suspects, with one writing: "They already know that I, for example, blocked 17 places in the system."

Legal experts warn that such AI consultations could create additional evidentiary risks. Digital communications with chatbots may become discoverable evidence, and reliance on generic advice could undermine proper defense strategies. The case serves as a practical reminder that while AI tools offer accessibility, they cannot replace jurisdiction-specific legal counsel—particularly for charges carrying potential imprisonment.

Trials are pending for all 33 defendants. If convicted, penalties could include significant fines and incarceration under Romania's anti-corruption laws. Prosecutors maintain that the seat-blocking scheme caused demonstrable harm through lost ticket revenue and system manipulation, regardless of whether individual victims sought compensation.