Government Adviser Proposes AI Integration for Criminal Risk Evaluation
Artificial intelligence should be deployed to help gauge the risk of allowing criminals to avoid prison or be released early, according to a prominent government adviser. Martyn Evans, chairman of the Sentencing and Penal Policy Commission, has stated that AI will undoubtedly play a significant role within the criminal justice system, potentially assisting judges in determining whether offenders should receive jail sentences.
AI's Potential Role in Judicial Decision-Making
AI programmes could analyze whether individuals are safe to be released into the community early or whether they should avoid custodial sentences in favour of community service alternatives. This proposal comes despite widespread concerns regarding AI's accuracy and its troubling tendency to hallucinate or generate incorrect information. The commission, established by Justice Secretary Angela Constance, has put forward recommendations to effectively phase out prison sentences of up to two years and reduce the prison population by nearly half over the coming decade.
Speaking exclusively to the Mail, Mr Evans, who previously served as chairman of the Scottish Police Authority, expressed his absolute conviction that artificial intelligence will have a crucial role in risk assessment and other judicial areas. He emphasized that AI should complement rather than replace human judgment, stating: "The thing is not to put all your eggs in an AI report - AI aids human insight."
Transforming Routine Reporting and Assessment
Evans elaborated on how AI could transform the justice system's operational efficiency: "So for criminal justice social workers having to do thousands and thousands of reports, police, procurators, it will help if you have a structured system to pull data from various sources and draft. But the key for me is that AI is an aid to human reporting."
He acknowledged both the potential benefits and limitations of the technology: "It will reduce the time it takes, increase some of the information available, but we know AI has faults and it can make things up. It's improving dramatically - it will be the same with judgments, frankly. Judges will probably also use AI - they're bound to; it's difficult to predict."
The chairman stressed the importance of maintaining human oversight: "But if we keep the human responsible for the outcome - AI can assist the human - I think it will transform routine reporting, and the professional can add their judgment and their insight and see where you end up. But the AI can do some of the grind about [a criminal's] history of offending – that's what you want, that combination."
Current Applications and Scottish Context
AI could potentially assist police forces in navigating complex risk assessment procedures. In November of last year, Police Scotland revealed that officers had dedicated 1,000 hours to helping prison authorities assess which criminals might be suitable for early release to alleviate jail overcrowding. The Scottish Government has released hundreds of prisoners amid a severe overcrowding crisis, requiring officers and civilian staff to meticulously review offender records for potential release candidates.
Senior police officials have warned about coping with reoffending by released criminals, prompting the Scottish Police Authority to demand detailed reports on crimes committed by former inmates. This situation highlights the pressing need for more efficient risk assessment tools within the justice system.
Precedents and Regulatory Concerns
Last month, Judge Alexander Kemp, who presided over the Sandie Peggie employment tribunal, was cleared of misconduct allegations after being accused of fabricating quotes using artificial intelligence. He was forced to reissue his controversial judgment twice to correct twelve mistakes, including four instances where quoted legal precedents did not actually exist in the referenced rulings. Although claims that AI wrote the original judgment were later rejected, the incident underscores potential pitfalls.
The Oxford Institute of Technology and Justice reported last year that despite increasing AI adoption in legal contexts, no statutory regulations currently govern AI use in criminal proceedings. The institute noted that some English police forces already employ AI for predictive analytics to forecast reoffending likelihood, facial recognition, and automated redaction processes.
According to their findings: "Courts [south of the Border] are using AI for case management, and (increasingly) for legal research, analysis and drafting support. As of September 2025, the first English judge has disclosed his use of AI to assist in producing a judgment. Defence counsel have used AI for evidence discovery and disclosure in criminal trials, including to analyse and identify key evidence and individuals of interest."
Scottish Implementation and Safeguards
The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service has announced plans to establish comprehensive protocols for the safe deployment, operation, and decommissioning of AI systems. They stated: "Measures will also be put in place to detect and mitigate any 'hallucinations' (incorrect or nonsensical outputs) through robust testing, validation and monitoring. We will identify and assess potential risks, taking appropriate steps to mitigate and monitor these."
Last week, the Sentencing Commission published proposals that would enable criminals, including violent offenders and sex offenders facing sentences up to two years, to potentially avoid incarceration. Experts advising the Scottish Government argue that too many offenders are being imprisoned and advocate for reduced custodial sentences.
Political Response and Cautionary Notes
Scottish Tory justice spokesman Liam Kerr responded cautiously to the AI proposals: "AI will clearly transform a huge number of professions, but its use within the judicial system will require caution and clear rules. There have been instances of AI 'hallucination' where information, including legal precedent, has been cited and turned out to be entirely fictitious. There must be safeguards in place if it is to be used, even for routine assistance."
The commission's comprehensive proposals include measures that would lead to thousands more prisoners receiving community service orders and electronic monitoring instead of jail time. Additional reforms would allow police to issue fixed penalties to violent offenders, while those sentenced to more than four years imprisonment would be automatically released after serving two-thirds of their sentences.
