If a police officer shot your family member, beat someone in custody, or caused a death in jail, you probably already know that what ends up in the official police report matters enormously to your case. Reports written by officers shape the narrative — and for decades, families and attorneys have had to fight to challenge them.

Now, California has added a new wrinkle: artificial intelligence is being used to write police reports. And as of January 1, 2026, a new state law requires police to tell you when that happened.

Here is what this law means, why it matters for civil rights cases, and what families should do to protect their rights.

What Does the New Law Require?

California’s new law mandates that any police report written fully or partially by artificial intelligence must:

• Disclose that the report was created with AI, using the specific phrase: “This report was written either fully or in part using artificial intelligence”
• Identify which AI software was used, including the version
• Retain the first (original) AI-generated draft for as long as the final report is kept
• Require the officer to verify everything in the AI-written report and sign it, attesting that it is true and correct

In other words: if an officer uses AI to write or edit a report about a shooting, use of force, or in-custody death — that must now be on the record.

Why AI-Written Police Reports Are a Problem

AI language models are powerful, but they are not neutral. They generate text based on patterns — and in law enforcement, those patterns reflect decades of police-centric language and framing. An AI tool trained on police reports will write police reports that sound authoritative, consistent, and professional — even when the underlying events were not.

There are several specific concerns for civil rights cases:

1. AI Can Fill Gaps With Assumptions
When an officer gives the AI a rough account, the AI may “complete” the narrative in ways that favor the officer — adding detail, cleaning up inconsistencies, or framing ambiguous events in the most favorable legal light. The original, unpolished account may paint a very different picture.

2. AI “Hallucinations” Can Introduce False Facts
AI tools are known to generate plausible-sounding but incorrect information — a phenomenon called “hallucination.” In a police report, a hallucinated detail about what a victim said, what weapon was present, or how a confrontation began could be used to justify the use of force — even if it never happened.

3. The Officer May Not Have Carefully Read What the AI Wrote
Even though officers are now required to verify and sign AI-generated reports, the reality is that people tend to skim and approve text that looks polished and correct. A report that reads smoothly may be approved without careful scrutiny of every factual claim.

This is why the requirement to preserve the original AI draft is so significant. That first draft — before the officer edited or approved it — could be critical evidence in a civil rights lawsuit.

What This Means for Civil Rights Cases in California

For families pursuing a civil rights claim after a police shooting, excessive force incident, or death in custody, this law creates new tools and new obligations:

Demand the Original AI Draft
Under this law, police departments must preserve the original AI-generated report. Through discovery in a civil lawsuit, or through a California Public Records Act (CPRA) request, your attorney can demand both the final signed report and the first AI draft. Discrepancies between the two can be powerful evidence of how the narrative was shaped after the fact.

Challenge Report Credibility More Directly
AI-written reports can now be challenged not just on the facts they contain, but on how they were generated. Did the AI software have known biases? Was the officer’s original input accurate? Was the AI version significantly different from what the officer initially described? These are now legitimate lines of inquiry.

Identify Undisclosed AI Use
The law only works if it is followed. If a department fails to disclose AI authorship and it later comes to light — through metadata, software logs, or a whistleblower — that failure to disclose is itself a serious issue that can affect the credibility of the entire report and the officers involved.

What Should Families Do Right Now?

If your loved one was injured or killed by law enforcement in California, here are immediate steps to take:

1. Contact a civil rights attorney as soon as possible. The deadline to file a government tort claim is just 6 months from the date of the incident.

2. Ask your attorney to file a California Public Records Act request for all police reports, including any AI-generated drafts, related to the incident.

3. Request body camera footage, dispatch logs, and any AI tools or software used in report preparation.

4. Do not assume the police report is accurate. Challenge everything, especially if the report seems unusually polished or inconsistent with what witnesses or video show.

At Gastélum Law, we have spent years fighting to challenge the government’s version of events in police shooting and in-custody death cases. The rise of AI-written police reports is a new frontier — and we are already watching it closely on behalf of our clients.