Axon, the law enforcement technology company known for making stun guns and body cameras, has a new tool that police departments around the country have started incorporating into their work. It’s an artificial intelligence-based software tool called Draft One, which essentially helps officers draft police reports in record time — and it’s reportedly one of Axon’s fastest-growing products.
In Fort Collins, Colorado, for example, police reports that once took almost an hour to draft can now be knocked out in about 10 minutes, according to recent coverage from CNN. Part of the time-saving trick here involves Axon’s software working up a report based on an automated transcript from the officer’s body cam, and the officer can then give that draft their own once-over before officially filing it.
But how would you feel if you were a defendant and the paperwork that once took an hour can now be done in ten minutes thanks to automation? No surprise, this kind of technology is raising concern from civil rights groups and legal experts. After all: When’s the last time you used an automated transcription tool and the result was flawless? Now imagine your freedom was on the line as a result of those mistakes.
From time-saver to potential legal flashpoint
Given how AI is already reshaping everything from customer service to healthcare, its move into police work comes as little surprise. Axon claims the Draft One software can shave 70% off the time spent filing police reports, which at least in theory gives officers more time to do other police work. The software is also envisioned as a kind of stopgap measure to support understaffed police departments, and the way it works is officers request a transcript after recording an encounter via their body cam. The software spits out a draft report in seconds — the tool encouraging further review of the report from there.
Opponents, meanwhile, argue that not saving the original AI draft (which the software doesn’t do) makes it harder to verify accuracy and can potentially undermine transparency. Some prosecutors have gone even further; one prosecutor’s office in Washington state has already declared that it won’t accept police reports that have been prepared with any input from AI software like Draft One.
As far as other concerns go, there’s also worry that automating the transcription of police encounters could overlook nonverbal signals or even introduce hidden biases into official paperwork. The ACLU has urged police agencies to stay away from this technology, while the state of Utah has passed a law that requires police to clearly disclose when AI helped produce a final report.
Axon says it’s taken steps to clamp down on the software making mistakes, including by working with researchers, community leaders, and justice advocates to evolve the tool responsibly. On the one hand, the argument here is that it’s a valuable time-saver — but critics warn that without firm safeguards, the technology could erode the fairness of the criminal justice process.
