Tasmania Police AI Trial Halved Family Violence Report Time but Introduced Errors
Tasmania Police tested an artificial intelligence tool that drafts family violence reports from body-worn camera audio and found it nearly halved writing time, but it also introduced errors, according to Right to Information documents reported by ABC News on October 23. The force says any wider rollout is still under review.
The product, Draft One from US company Axon, analyses camera audio and produces a narrative that officers must review, edit and approve. In the first phase of the evaluation it worked through almost 150 randomly selected recordings from past family violence incidents. A second phase ran in Launceston over several months in 2025, comparing reports written the usual way with AI-assisted ones. Assisted reports were written and validated in 42 minutes, almost twice as fast, and the evaluation estimated annual savings of about 160 weeks of work time and $434,187 in wages, with far larger savings possible if the tool were used for offence, child safety and crash reports.
The errors are the part that matters most. Draft One sometimes confused names and roles and, in a small share of cases, missed a threat, assault or risk factor. In one historical case it recorded that a woman had described threats against her life, when the footage showed she had said there were no threats; an officer suspected overlapping speech confused the system. The evaluation found the tool handled simple exchanges between one officer and one person well, but its accuracy fell when partners, children or other witnesses were present.
What it means in practice
Tom Sulston of Digital Rights Watch told the ABC the tool was least functional where it would be most useful, and questioned whether officers could rely on AI-assisted reports in court. Alina Thomas of the support service Engender Equality welcomed help for police but said a human must stay in the lead, and suggested victim-survivors get a say in whether AI analyses their incidents. The evaluation itself recommended a phased rollout only after clear ethics policies are in place, plus funding for licences and staff.
Government use of AI is under unusual scrutiny in Australia this month, from law changes weighed after the OpenAI Medicare agent incident to the TGA's finding that most AI scribes it reviewed may be medical devices, a close cousin of police report drafting. Law enforcement has also been warning about AI from the other side, as when the AFP told Parliament AI is speeding up youth radicalisation.
What to watch: whether Tasmania funds Draft One licences, what consultation and further trials precede any rollout, and whether other state forces publish evaluations of their own.