On June 7, according to a report by the Financial Times, multiple police departments in the UK have been instructed to stop using artificial intelligence systems to draft court statements and carry out other criminal justice-related tasks due to concerns that inaccurate content generated by AI could disrupt the judicial process. Alex Murray, head of the UK Police AI Hub (Police.AI), stated that interventions have been made in some police forces that were using commercial AI tools without completing comprehensive compliance assessments, halting some related applications and notifying the relevant forces to suspend their use immediately. He added that any technology applied in the criminal justice system must meet stringent accuracy standards. This suspension highlights the growing controversy over the use of generative AI in policing. Murray oversees the regulation of AI use by police forces in England and Wales. He said that while the technology has the potential to accelerate case investigation and evidence processing efficiency, a robust safety assurance mechanism must be established before full-scale implementation. Established this year, Police.AI is one of the UK government's reform initiatives aimed at enhancing overall policing efficiency, backed by £115 million in funding. According to Murray, some police forces had been using commercial AI systems to assist officers in compiling interrogation transcripts into court statements, prompting immediate intervention from the Police AI Hub. He emphasized that the preparation of evidence disclosure lists requires particular caution. Murray admitted that there have been previous incidents involving police use of AI. Last year, West Midlands Police used content generated by Microsoft's AI assistant, Copilot, in compiling supporting materials for an injunction, which included a fabricated past event involving Israel's Maccabi Tel Aviv football team. Despite these risks, Murray believes that fully tested AI systems can significantly benefit police forces, such as in surveillance video analysis and handling vast amounts of electronic evidence. He argues that with proper regulatory rules, usage guidelines, and personnel training, the benefits of automation technology far outweigh the drawbacks.