In law enforcement, getting the facts right is everything. And in a police report, one misheard word in a transcription can derail an investigation, spark litigation, and undermine public confidence. With the recent trend toward AI-powered transcription tools, the integrity of sworn statements, interrogations, and incident reports are at risk.
Despite promises of speed and cost savings, AI-generated transcriptions are plagued by a growing list of problems, including fabricated content, bias, legal uncertainty, and a lack of evidentiary accountability.
In one well-documented incident, OpenAI’s transcription model Whisper was caught inserting entire passages that never occurred in the original audio, including violent and sensational content.
“…38% of hallucinations include explicit harms such as perpetuating violence, making up inaccurate associations, or implying false authority.”
Koenecke, et. al, Columbia University
In law enforcement, these aren’t minor typos. These are software-invented statements that could affect the outcome of a case.
A federal judge recently sanctioned two attorneys who submitted an AI-generated legal brief containing fake case citations (source). The takeaway was clear: humans - not software - are ultimately responsible for what ends up in official documents.
Law enforcement agencies using AI transcriptions without human review risk:
If an AI transcription alters or misrepresents a suspect statement, it invites grounds for suppression - or worse, civil litigation.
The ACLU contends that AI-generated police reports pose significant transparency and bias concerns. Moreover, the organization also asserts that the vendors supplying the technology are incentivized to frame narratives favorably for law enforcement (ACLU Report).
Meanwhile, sensitive recordings - from informant interviews to IA investigations - are being fed into cloud-based AI systems with unclear storage policies and no legal guarantees around who can access that data.
Add to that:
Unlike corporate meetings or clean studio recordings, police recordings often include:
AI tools don’t reliably parse this complexity. In real-world testing, ASR models often misidentify speakers or mangle critical phrases. In IA investigations, suspect interviews, or jail calls, these mistakes can change lives – and ruin cases.
RTC is purpose-built for agencies that need evidence-grade transcription:
Even AI’s strongest advocates agree: these systems should never be used as the final word in evidentiary documents. Treating AI-generated transcriptions as official police records is not only risky, but it also poses significant legal and ethical liabilities.
Transcriptions are evidence. Treat them that way.
Download our Vendor Evaluation Checklist or Talk To Us and see how real evidence-grade transcription works - without shortcuts, automation, or compromise.