A New Tool Changes How Officers Handle Paperwork
Police departments across the United States are adopting Draft One, an artificial intelligence-powered software developed by Axon, the company known for producing tasers and body cameras. The technology generates the first draft of police reports using transcripts from body camera footage, significantly reducing the time officers spend on paperwork.
In Fort Collins, Colorado, officers say the tool has cut report writing time by nearly 70%. Officer Scott Brittingham, initially skeptical, now completes reports in around 10 minutes instead of 45, allowing him to take more calls and focus on crime prevention. Draft One’s expansion comes amid widespread staffing shortages, with many agencies operating at least 10% below authorized levels.
Efficiency and Potential Risks
After an officer records an interaction, Draft One produces a draft within seconds, leaving fill-in-the-blank prompts to ensure officers review and finalize the report. Axon says the software, powered by a customized version of OpenAI’s ChatGPT, has been trained to minimize factual errors and avoid speculation.
The tool has been rolled out in departments in Indiana, Florida, and California, with Axon noting that nearly every U.S. department uses at least one of its products. Proponents highlight its potential to make reports more accurate and comprehensive, but critics warn of risks including bias, transcription errors, and transparency concerns.
Some prosecutors share those concerns. King County, Washington, has rejected AI-drafted police reports, warning they may contain unintentional errors. Civil rights advocates, such as the ACLU, argue that integrating AI into a justice system already prone to bias demands heightened scrutiny. Experts also point to the possibility of misunderstandings in transcripts, especially with different accents or nonverbal communication not captured in audio.
Transparency and Legal Considerations
By default, final reports generated with Draft One include a disclaimer stating they were assisted by AI, but departments can remove it. While Fort Collins does not include disclaimers, Utah recently passed a law requiring them in all AI-assisted police reports.
Axon defends the tool’s design, stating that the absence of saved drafts mirrors traditional practices where handwritten report drafts were not archived. The company also offers an optional setting that requires officers to edit a percentage of the draft before submission.
The debate underscores a broader question: how to balance efficiency with accountability in law enforcement technology. Supporters see AI as a valuable time-saving tool, while opponents stress the importance of accuracy and transparency, especially when reports influence legal outcomes such as prosecutions, bail decisions, and court testimonies.
A Tool, Not a Replacement
For many officers, Draft One is an aid rather than a substitute for traditional reporting. “It’s not replacing us writing reports. It’s just a tool to help us,” Brittingham said. Experts like Andrew Guthrie Ferguson, a law professor specializing in technology and policing, believe AI-assisted reporting may become standard practice, but insist that responsible use and clear oversight are essential.
As law enforcement agencies weigh the benefits and risks, the implementation of AI in policing remains a test case for how emerging technologies reshape the justice system — promising faster workflows but requiring vigilance to safeguard fairness and public trust.