Integrating Artificial Intelligence and Predictive Analytics in Police Discipline
At the ANZPAA Police Conference 2025, Assistant Commissioner Simon Watkins of South Australia Police delivered a sharp, uncompromising look at how artificial intelligence (AI) and predictive analytics could reshape policing discipline systems.
He stressed that AI must serve as an aid to human judgment, not a substitute for it, and should be used to strengthen ethical decision-making and reinforce the culture of policing. “AI doesn’t replace our agency’s values—and neither should it. What AI can do is support those things if built and governed carefully,” A/C Watkins told delegates.
A/C Watkins began by revisiting a principle that has guided policing for centuries: public trust as the foundation of effective law enforcement. In an era dominated by technology, that principle remains unchanged.
“Integrity is too important to leave to trust alone”, he said. “Public trust in police is earned through our actions and the systems we build. AI offers an opportunity to strengthen both.”
He acknowledged the scepticism that often surrounds new technology, particularly when it appears to monitor or control.
“We’ve all heard it—‘the computer can’t tell me how to police,’” he noted. “Those concerns are valid. They should be front of mind because they shape how we integrate technology into daily practice.”
AI presents opportunities for policing: improving consistency and fairness in disciplinary processes, detecting bias and enabling proactive interventions through early warning systems. These systems can identify stress indicators or repeated complaints, allowing agencies to intervene before issues escalate. A/C Watkins noted “These signals don’t automatically mean misconduct, they highlight officers who might need support - counselling, mentoring, retraining - before issues escalate.”
While artificial intelligence offers significant opportunities for policing, it also introduces notable risks. Systems trained on historical data can inadvertently perpetuate existing biases and an excessive dependence on AI-generated recommendations may diminish the role of human judgment in decision-making. The complexity and opacity of many AI models—often described as ‘black boxes’—make it difficult to ensure transparency. When these systems produce flawed recommendations, the question of accountability becomes challenging, raising important issues about whether responsibility lies with individual officers, leadership, oversight bodies or technology providers. These are critical considerations that must be addressed as AI becomes more integrated into police discipline systems.
Practical applications discussed included complaint triage, evidence review in an era of overwhelming digital data and training simulations that use AI to create realistic ethical scenarios. A/C Watkins stressed that governance frameworks are essential to ensure compliance with privacy laws, maintain transparency and embed human oversight.
A/C Watkins urged agencies to view AI as a partner rather than a control mechanism. “Technology should enhance people’s vision, not replace it. AI, when paired with ethical governance and human oversight, becomes a partner in building a more positive, sustainable policing culture,” he said.
His final words captured the essence of the challenge ahead: “The value is going to come from our people trusting us and what we do. To do that, they need to understand how we got to where we got to when it comes to decisions.”
This editorial draws directly from Assistant Commissioner Simon Watkins presentation at the ANZPAA Police Conference 2025.
Members only access
All Australia and New Zealand police members/employees are entitled to access this publication through ANZPAA's secure member site. You must provide your official police jurisdictional email address to subscribe.
LoginSubscribe
BACK TO BLOG