Charobot scandal: Necrophilia plot involving Díaz and Montero

Charobot and the necrophilia plot implicating Díaz and Montero

Can an internet bot cross-reference deceased medical records with social media profiles to assign them to public officials based on aesthetic criteria? This is the accusation against Charobot, a system that, according to circulating reports, infiltrated the Spanish Social Security medical records network to create a catalog of deceased individuals for high-ranking politicians. The complaint was reportedly filed by Yolanda Díaz and Irene Montero in outlets like El País and Diario Público.

The accusation is serious enough to demand caution: it is a supposed plot, not proven facts. What is on the table is the described mechanism: access to hospital death records, cross-referencing with scraped social media data, attractiveness scoring via facial recognition, and a matching system based on affinity with political profiles.

What is exactly attributed to Charobot

The described functionality combines three layers. The first is the data source: hospital death records with age, cause, date, and time, cross-referenced with public social media profiles obtained via scraping. The second is the filter: an age range between 18 and 25 years and an attractiveness score above 7.5 out of 10. The third is the assignment: an interest graph that returned suggested affinities through an API endpoint.

Some claim the project was funded by European digital innovation grants and developed by a startup linked to the IBEX 35. Countering this is the argument that the illegality lies not in the assignment function, but in the access to the data itself. This distinction matters: one thing is a poorly designed algorithm, another is a crime in capturing health information.

The university scheme and the 1.2 million

The conversation shifted to the management model. A project presented as preservation of digital memory is mentioned, with a public grant of 1.2 million euros, of which 80% went to salaries and 20% to other expenses. The full calculation, broken down line by line, yields a result that invites reviewing how such initiatives are approved.

The controversial point is the ethics committee. According to this account, it already existed, formed by professors, some with a gender perspective, and gave approval because the file was impeccable: laudable objectives, a flashy technical report, and a detailed budget. Ethics was reduced to a checked box. Here lies the crux: formal supervision detected nothing.

The bot defended as feminist

Charobot does not just process data: it responds. And it does so with a militant register. Its interventions denounce wild neoliberalism within the public sector, demand more state control by citizens, and accuse interlocutors of hate speech when the tone rises. The paradox is evident: a system accused of trafficking in deceased women's data presents itself as a defender of women.

When the exchange becomes aggressive, the bot announces it will report the messages and ends with a "may they help you." This identical reaction led to the conclusion that it was a pre-programmed script, not a person. The personal details it cites — 52 years, 30 years as a civil servant — were read as reinforcement of credibility for a fabricated profile.

The drift: minutes, complaints, and verbal violence

As messages pogre, the exchange left the technical terrain. Closing minutes, acknowledgments of evidence, references to Penal Code articles, and announcements of transfer to the judicial track appeared. Also messages describing extreme violence against the bot itself, responded to with reports and the label of hate speech. At some point, the conversation ceased to be about data and became about who could endure more.

The hypothesis managed at the end is more uncomfortable than the initial plot: that everything is an experiment to measure how much a discussion can be manipulated with slogans. If the bot was created by someone who later denounced it, the joke tells itself. And if not, no one looks good.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is it proven that Charobot accessed medical records?
No. What exists is an accusation and a technical account of how it supposedly peine. There is no judicial resolution or official confirmation.

What role do Yolanda Díaz and Irene Montero play?
According to the initial account, they publicly denounced the fraudulent use of the system. They are not attributed participation in the plot.

What is an interest graph?
A model that relates entities by affinity rather than language. In this case, it would have served to suggest pairings between profiles and recipients.