Concerned that AI created false material to disrupt justice, the British police were asked to stop using AI to write court statements

According to information from IT House 7 June, according to the British Financial Times, a number of British police services have been advised to discontinue the use of artificial intelligence systems for the preparation of court statements and other criminal justice-related work, owing to concerns that inaccurate content generated by artificial intelligence could disrupt judicial processes.

British Police Centre for Artificial Intelligence

The chief, Alex Murray, said he was involved in the intervention. These units began using commercially available artificial intelligence tools without completing a full compliance assessment. "We've stopped some of the applications." Murray stated that he told the relevant police unit that “it will be suspended immediately and we need to slow down the pace”.

He added that the accuracy of any technology applied to the criminal justice system must meet stringent criteria to dispel reasonable doubt.

The suspension of the operation highlighted the growing controversy about the use of artificial intelligence at birth in the area of policing. Murray is responsible for overseeing the use of artificial intelligence by the police in England and Wales. He indicated that this technology could eventually be expected to speed up the efficiency of case detection and evidence processing, but that a well-developed safety and security mechanism would have to be in place before it could be fully rolled out.

This year, it was formally launched as one of the reforms introduced by the British Government to improve the overall efficiency of the police. According to the Home Secretary of the United Kingdom, Shabana Mahmoud, the project received a total of Pound115 million in three years (IT House Note: the current exchange rate is approximately RMB 1,046 million) in financial support, saving human time after its use, which is equivalent to an additional 3000 police personnel for approximately 145,000 serving officers in England and Wales.

According to Murray, some units began to use the commercial artificial intelligence system to assist police officers in compiling interrogation notes into court statements, and the police artificial intelligence centre intervened.

Murray did not disclose the specific units involved, but stated that the police had also been reminded that artificial intelligence should not be used in other police operations until all compliance reviews had been completed.

“We clearly informed some of the police forces that this could not be done at this time because the full audit and checks and balances process has not yet been completed.” He said.

In particular, he noted the need for extra care in the preparation of the list of evidence disclosures. Such lists are records of evidence that must be submitted to the defence prior to trial. Police units that use artificial intelligence to handle this work must indicate how the technology is being trained and how it is being applied in practice.

Murray stated that the police had a history of using artificial intelligence. Last year, the Simidranz County Police used Microsoft Intelligence Assistant Copilot ' s production in preparing a supporting document for the ban. This material was intended to apply for a ban on a football club fan-playing game, which concocted a past match with the Tel Aviv Makabi team in Israel. The fans were scheduled to go to the scene to watch the team's match with Aston Vila.

The incident further raised widespread concern about the problem of artificial intelligence hallucinations, which are the generation of seemingly real and factually false information by artificial intelligence systems.

“All police units now have a system in place to regulate the use of Copilot, requiring police officers to verify all the elements generated by the tool.” Murray said.

In spite of the many pitfalls, Murray believes that a fully tested artificial intelligence system can make a significant contribution to a police force in an increasingly complex situation of increased workload and investigation of cases.

Surveillance video analysis is the most promising course of application. At this stage, police officers often take hours to view the video manually and search for suspects.

Murray says: “As long as the instructions are properly set, artificial intelligence is perfectly capable of being retrieved as required, such as `Find out the man in the red hat'. Within hours or even a day or two of the key value of the evidence, we will be able to target, capture and spot blood-stained shoe certificates.”

He also referred to the ability of artificial intelligence to handle large amounts of electronic evidence, as exemplified by the detection of child sexual abuse cases. A tool is currently being developed by the Police Centre of Artificial Intelligence to identify and classify images from seized equipment and to reduce the number of direct visits by police officers to negative images.

Murray said: “Police officers need only a sample check, and they need not look at the whole picture one by one. Such content can cause great physical and mental harm. In my view, the benefits of automation technology are far greater than the disadvantages, provided that they are accompanied by improved regulatory rules, norms of use and training of personnel.”

Advertising statements: The external jump links (including not limited to hyperlinks, 2D codes, passwords, etc.) contained in the text are used to convey more information and save time for selection purposes only for reference purposes, which are included in all IT House articles.