Police officer used AI to create statement - court

The Court of Appeal has rejected a sentence appeal by a man who threatened his partner with a knife, after it emerged a police officer had used AI to draft a witness statement.

The court heard the officer, who has been removed from front-line duties, used Microsoft Copilot to create a statement to "make a judge or reader weep" and help secure the highest sentence.

Jerome Gibson, 23, was jailed for 44 months last year after kicking down a door, threatening his partner with a knife, and later causing grievous bodily harm to a police officer.

His lawyer argued the statement led the sentencing judge to place greater weight on the harm caused, but judges rejected Gibson's appeal on Tuesday.

The AI-generated statement, the court heard, was used in the conviction of Gibson, who admitted kicking the door down and threatening his partner in May 2024.

In a separate incident, he barged into a police officer while fleeing and dislocated his shoulder.

Gibson was sentenced at Nottingham Crown Court last year.

Lucky Thandi, for Gibson, said the statement, presented as being written by Gibson's partner - referred to as F - "had been computer-generated by the officer in the case".

Thandi said the officer made "multiple entries" into Microsoft Copilot while "intending the reader to be tearful".

She said: "It does make powerful reading, and it is plain from the material that has been provided to the appellants and those who instruct me, that this particular officer had made great efforts to ensure that the victim personal statement had read as powerfully as it possibly could."

Denis Barry, for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), said the judge in Nottingham would have seen a number of statements, and was experienced enough to know what to focus on to hand down an appropriate sentence.

He added: "Everyone in court would agree that facts in criminal cases speak for themselves and they do not require exaggerated language in criminal proceedings.

"The conduct of the officer is concerning, not so much because of the use of technology, but it displays a use of evidence gathering that is concerning."

Mr Justice Lavender, sitting with Lord Justice Edis and Mr Justice Linden, said the officer had instructed AI to create "the most impactful personal statement".

The officer was said to have told it: "I want you to create it so that it meets the higher harm category."

The judge also said he told the AI that its "goal is to reach the highest sentence" and instructed it "to make a judge or reader weep".

Lavender said: "These facts were not AI-generated hallucinations, but things F had stated in her interview.

"It does not appear that the use of AI, deplorable though it is, caused the appellant's sentence to be any longer than it otherwise would have."

The judge added: "We do not consider that the total sentence was manifestly excessive."

Listen to BBC Radio Nottingham on Sounds and follow BBC Nottingham on Facebook, on X, or on Instagram. Send your story ideas to eastmidsnews@bbc.co.uk or via WhatsApp on 0808 100 2210.