Shannon Mosher v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Record source: imported from Damien Charlotin’s AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC BY 4.0); document hosted in his archive: open the upstream document. What AI Vortex adds.
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal · Sep 23, 2026
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | The Tribunal found that no decision titled Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada) existed on CanLII or the Tribunal’s website; the cited neutral citation led to a different decision. Outcome: The Tribunal found that Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada), 2022 CHRT 21 did not exist and ordered the self-represented complainant to ensure the accuracy of future submissions.. Mr. Mosher submitted five legal citations that the RCMP could not locate. The Tribunal specifically examined Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada), 2022 CHRT 21, found no decision of that name on CanLII or the Tribunal’s website, and determined that the neutral citation led to a different decision. The Tribunal concluded that the case did not exist, warned that inaccurate citations delay proceedings and affect their integrity, and ordered Mr. Mosher to ensure the accuracy of future submissions. No monetary or professional sanction was imposed.
- Why the court cared
- The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records The Tribunal found that Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada), 2022 CHRT 21 did not exist and ordered the self-represented complainant to ensure the accuracy of future submissions.. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations with The Tribunal found that Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada), 2022 CHRT 21 did not exist and ordered the self-represented complainant to ensure the accuracy of future submissions. in Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | The Tribunal found that no decision titled Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada) existed on CanLII or the Tribunal’s website; the cited neutral citation led to a different decision. Outcome: The Tribunal found that Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada), 2022 CHRT 21 did not exist and ordered the self-represented complainant to ensure the accuracy of future submissions.. Mr. Mosher submitted five legal citations that the RCMP could not locate. The Tribunal specifically examined Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada), 2022 CHRT 21, found no decision of that name on CanLII or the Tribunal’s website, and determined that the neutral citation led to a different decision. The Tribunal concluded that the case did not exist, warned that inaccurate citations delay proceedings and affect their integrity, and ordered Mr. Mosher to ensure the accuracy of future submissions. No monetary or professional sanction was imposed.
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with The Tribunal found that Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada), 2022 CHRT 21 did not exist and ordered the self-represented complainant to ensure the accuracy of future submissions. in Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
The Tribunal found that Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada), 2022 CHRT 21 did not exist and ordered the self-represented complainant to ensure the accuracy of future submissions.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
1 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | The Tribunal found that no decision titled Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada) existed on CanLII or the Tribunal’s website; the cited neutral citation led to a different decision.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Shannon Mosher v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police?
- Fabricated: Case Law | The Tribunal found that no decision titled Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada) existed on CanLII or the Tribunal’s website; the cited neutral citation led to a different decision. Outcome: The Tribunal found that Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada), 2022 CHRT 21 did not exist and ordered the self-represented complainant to ensure the accuracy of future submissions.. Mr. Mosher submitted five legal citations that the RCMP could not locate. The Tribunal specifically examined Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada), 2022 CHRT 21, found no decision of that name on CanLII or the Tribunal’s website, and determined that the neutral citation led to a different decision. The Tribunal concluded that the case did not exist, warned that inaccurate citations delay proceedings and affect their integrity, and ordered Mr. Mosher to ensure the accuracy of future submissions. No monetary or professional sanction was imposed.
- Why does Shannon Mosher v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations with The Tribunal found that Luong v. Treasury Board (Canada), 2022 CHRT 21 did not exist and ordered the self-represented complainant to ensure the accuracy of future submissions. in Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Shannon Mosher v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police?
- The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
- Which source supports this Shannon Mosher v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police summary?
- The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.
Weekly alert: new AI-hallucination court cases
One short email a week with the newly recorded cases, courts and sanctions. Free, no spam, unsubscribe anytime.