In the months before a gunman killed eight people — six of them children — at a Canadian school in February, a thirty-year-old man in Washington state was quietly woven into the planning: offering money, technical guidance, and a promise to watch. The arrest of James Codey Bryant on conspiracy charges asks an old question in a new register — how much does proximity to evil, without intervention, constitute participation in it? The case, which already implicated an AI company's silence, now reveals that behind the algorithm stood a human being who knew, helped, hesitated, and said nothing to th
US man arrested as accomplice in Canada school shooting planned with ChatGPT
Eight people killed, including six children, in a school shooting in Canada in February 2026.
He knew for months. He knew the plan. He chose not to report it.
Mark
So Bryant and Van Rootselaar never actually met in person—they were strangers who connected on a messaging app three years before the shooting?
Mimi
That's right. They met on Omegle, which was a random video chat platform. They kept in touch over those three years, and then starting in August 2025, Bryant began actively helping her plan.
Luke
But we should be clear about what "helping" means here. He sent her a hundred and fifteen dollars total. That's not nothing, but it's not a fortune. The more significant part is the technical advice—the VPN, the message deletion, and especially the car engine.
Mark
The car engine is the hinge, isn't it? Without that, she doesn't get to the school.
Mimi
Exactly. She killed her mother and half-brother at home, but then she was stuck. Bryant told her how to start the car. That's the moment where his involvement becomes directly causal to the deaths of the six children.
Luke
Though we should note what the authorities said: that Bryant tried to talk her out of it several times. So there's a contradiction in the record—he was discouraging her in some moments and enabling her in others.
Mark
Why didn't he just call the police if he was trying to stop her?
Mimi
That's the question everyone's asking. He knew for months. He knew the plan. He knew the timeline. And he chose not to report it.
Luke
We don't actually know his reasoning. The documents don't explain why he didn't call. That's still an open question.
Mark
And OpenAI knew too, through the ChatGPT conversations, but they also didn't report her.
Mimi
Right. So you have two separate failures—the AI company and the human accomplice—both aware, both choosing not to alert authorities.
Luke
Though the situations are different. OpenAI closed her account. Bryant actively helped her. The legal and moral weight isn't the same.
O Pulso
- Six children and two others were killed in a February school shooting in Canada — and investigators have now traced a thread of complicity across the border to a man in Washington state.
- James Codey Bryant allegedly coached the shooter through starting her car after she killed her own family members, a moment of technical help that may have made the school attack possible.
- Bryant had been in contact with the shooter for six months, sending money, advising her to delete messages and use a VPN, and agreeing to livestream the massacre — a commitment authorities suggest may have been decisive to whether she proceeded.
- On several occasions Bryant tried to talk the shooter out of it, yet he never contacted law enforcement — a distinction that now sits at the center of his legal jeopardy.
- The case compounds an already unfolding reckoning: OpenAI had flagged the shooter's chatbot conversations internally but did not alert police, and victims' families have since sued the company.
- US and Canadian authorities are now jointly prosecuting a case that will test how courts assign criminal responsibility to online facilitators who know of violence but choose neither to stop it nor to report it.
In the months before a gunman killed eight people — six of them children — at a Canadian school in February, a thirty-year-old man in Washington state was quietly woven into the planning: offering money, technical guidance, and a promise to watch. The arrest of James Codey Bryant on conspiracy charges asks an old question in a new register — how much does proximity to evil, without intervention, constitute participation in it? The case, which already implicated an AI company's silence, now reveals that behind the algorithm stood a human being who knew, helped, hesitated, and said nothing to those who could have stopped it.
A thirty-year-old Washington state man was arrested Tuesday on charges of conspiring to commit murder in a foreign country, accused of helping plan a mass shooting at a Canadian school in February that left eight people dead, including six children.
James Codey Bryant had been in contact with Jesse Van Rootselaar — the eighteen-year-old suspected shooter — for roughly six months before the attack. The two had originally met on the now-defunct messaging platform Omegle about three years earlier. According to court documents, Bryant began actively conspiring with Van Rootselaar by August 2025, at points instructing her to delete their messages and advising her to use a VPN when posting footage online.
His financial contributions were small — around one hundred dollars for shoes, fifteen for a lighter — but his technical assistance proved more consequential. After Van Rootselaar shot and killed her mother and half-brother at home, she could not start the car. Bryant walked her through it remotely, enabling her to drive to the school. He had also agreed to livestream the attack, a commitment authorities suggest may have been a deciding factor in whether she went through with it.
The arrest adds a human dimension to a case already marked by institutional failure. Van Rootselaar had used ChatGPT to plan the attack; OpenAI's safety team flagged the conversations internally but closed her account without notifying police. She simply opened a second account. Victims' families and the province of British Columbia have since sued OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman.
What emerged Tuesday was that alongside the algorithmic silence, a real person across the border had been listening and helping all along. Court documents describe deliberate concealment — deleted messages, encryption tools, broadcast planning — yet also note that Bryant made several attempts to dissuade Van Rootselaar. He never, however, contacted law enforcement.
That distinction — trying to stop her privately while refusing to involve authorities who might have intervened — now sits at the moral and legal heart of the case. US and Canadian authorities announced the charges jointly, and the prosecution will test how American courts handle conspiracy in cross-border violence, and what obligation online facilitators carry when they know what is coming.
A thirty-year-old man from western Washington state was arrested Tuesday on charges of conspiring to commit murder in a foreign country, accused of providing money and technical guidance to the person who carried out a mass shooting at a Canadian school in February that left eight people dead, including six children.
James Codey Bryant was detained by the US Department of Justice after authorities determined he had been in contact with Jesse Van Rootselaar, the eighteen-year-old suspected shooter, for roughly six months before the attack. The two had met on Omegle, a now-defunct messaging platform, about three years earlier and maintained contact through the period leading up to the killings. According to court documents reviewed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Bryant began actively conspiring with Van Rootselaar in August 2025 or earlier, at one point instructing her to delete their messages and later suggesting she use a VPN to avoid detection while posting a shooting video online.
The financial support Bryant allegedly provided was modest in scale but pointed: roughly one hundred dollars for shoes and fifteen dollars for a lighter. What made his involvement more consequential, authorities said, was the technical assistance he offered at critical moments. After Van Rootselaar shot and killed her mother and half-brother inside their family home, she could not start the car. Bryant walked her through how to turn on the engine, enabling her to drive to the school where she opened fire. He also agreed to livestream the attack itself—a commitment that law enforcement officials suggested may have been decisive in whether Van Rootselaar would have proceeded at all.
The case emerged from an investigation that had already drawn scrutiny toward OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT. Van Rootselaar had used the chatbot to plan the attack, discussing gun violence in conversations that OpenAI's safety team flagged internally. The company closed her account but did not alert police, and Van Rootselaar simply created a second account that went unmonitored. Victims' families and the province of British Columbia have since sued OpenAI and its CEO, Sam Altman, for failing to report her behavior to authorities.
What had not been publicly known until Tuesday's announcement was that Van Rootselaar was simultaneously discussing her plans with a human being on the other side of the border. The revelation that Bryant and Van Rootselaar were in direct contact adds a layer of human facilitation to what had already been understood as a case involving algorithmic failure. Authorities said there is no evidence the two ever met in person.
The indictment describes Bryant as knowingly and willfully conspiring with Van Rootselaar, and court documents show a pattern of deliberate concealment—deleting messages, using encryption tools, planning how to broadcast the attack online. Yet police also noted that on several occasions Bryant attempted to dissuade Van Rootselaar from carrying out the shooting. He did not, however, contact law enforcement. The distinction matters: Bryant appears to have been engaged enough to try to stop the attack but not engaged enough to report it to authorities who might have intervened.
Neil Floyd, the acting US attorney, and W Mike Herrington, the special agent in charge of the FBI's Seattle bureau, announced the charges at a joint press conference with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Bryant will be prosecuted in the United States as a US citizen under FBI investigation, with the bureau pledging continued cooperation with Canadian authorities. The case now stands as a test of how US courts will handle conspiracy charges involving violence committed across the border, and what responsibility online facilitators bear when they know of plans but choose neither to stop them nor to report them.
Citações Notáveis
Bryant offered money and technical advice to the suspected shooter for six months leading up to the killings— US Department of Justice
Police said that on several occasions Bryant tried to talk Van Rootselaar out of committing the attack, but did not contact law enforcement— Authorities
Quer a matéria completa?
Leia o original em The Guardian ↗
Crime & Justice