Speaker 1: The public has had a long held fascination with detectives.
Speaker 1: Detective see a side of life the average person is
Speaker 1: never exposed to. I spent thirty four years as a cop.
Speaker 1: For twenty five of those years, I was catching killers.
Speaker 1: That's what I did for a living. I was a
Speaker 1: homicide detective. I'm no longer just interviewing bad guys. Instead,
Speaker 1: I'm taking the public into the world in which I operated.
Speaker 1: The guests I talk to each week have amazing stories
Speaker 1: from all sides of the law. The interviews are raw
Speaker 1: and honest, just like the people I talk to. Some
Speaker 1: of the content and language might be confronting. That's because
Speaker 1: no one who comes into contact with crime is left unchanged.
Speaker 1: Join me now as I take you into this world.
Speaker 1: Besides using the phone to record a conversation with a
Speaker 1: person of interest which resulted in me being charged, I've
Speaker 1: never been accused of being an early adopter of technology.
Speaker 1: But the technology landscape is changing rapidly in the form
Speaker 1: of artificial intelligence, and it's going to impact dramatically on crime.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: I don't want to be left behind, so that's why
Speaker 1: I reached out the former detective and guest on this podcast,
Speaker 1: Graham Simpendorf to have a chat. For the past few years,
Speaker 1: Graham has made it his business to understand AI and
Speaker 1: see how it can be used to investigate crime and
Speaker 1: also prevent crime. Graham is the CEO of Perigon Investigations
Speaker 1: and specializes in using AI in the fight against crime.
Speaker 1: Now we can bury our head in the sand and
Speaker 1: pretend things are not going to change, but they are.
Speaker 1: Have a listened to what Graham has to say. I
Speaker 1: think it will become obvious that the utilization of AI
Speaker 1: is going to be the biggest change in criminal investigation
Speaker 1: since DNA technology came into play in the early nineties.
Speaker 1: I found the chat with Graham fascinating and informative. If
Speaker 1: you don't want to be left behind in this brave
Speaker 1: new world of AI, have a listen to what he
Speaker 1: has to say. Graham, thanks for I mean on I
Speaker 1: catch Killer's.
Speaker 2: My pleasure, Garran conceiging, well, it is good to see you.
Speaker 1: But I've got a confession to make them a little
Speaker 1: bit nervous, because when I talk technology, the amount of
Speaker 1: information I don't know can become blatantly obvious, and I
Speaker 1: don't want to come across as a dummy. So I
Speaker 1: give you full permission to not laugh at my questions,
Speaker 1: but just explain it in the most simple terms so
Speaker 1: I can understand it. Because when it comes to technology,
Speaker 1: I think if I can understand that, other people can
Speaker 1: understand it exactly right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I find the best way I'll explain it to
Speaker 2: some others, as if I'm just explained to my mum
Speaker 2: because she still struggle to turn on the computer. Yeah,
Speaker 2: but I think so many people are in that position.
Speaker 2: It's changing so rapidly. Everyone's finding a bit hard to
Speaker 2: get their head around.
Speaker 1: So yeah, yeah, well it has changed so rapidly, and
Speaker 1: when we talk rapidly, we're talking every sort of six months.
Speaker 1: We're having conversations that six months ago you wouldn't even comprehend,
Speaker 1: have you.
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly right. And I think that's probably one of
Speaker 2: the biggest challenges where we are facing in all parts
Speaker 2: of society, is how rapidly it's changing for us that
Speaker 2: are stuck in the middle trying to understand it. But
Speaker 2: then the kids are the next generation that are picking
Speaker 2: it up so quick and bringing into their employment already.
Speaker 2: There's a lot of challenges, but it's also exciting at
Speaker 2: the same time.
Speaker 1: Well, I think you need to. I half joke, but
Speaker 1: because I usually get dragged into technology, I don't embrace
Speaker 1: change too readily. But I'm certainly aware of a situation enough.
Speaker 1: Now you've got to get ahead of this or you're
Speaker 1: going to get left.
Speaker 2: Behind, exactly right. And look, we've seen a bit of
Speaker 2: that over our time, both in the cops and just
Speaker 2: in life, where we've seen all these massive changes introductions
Speaker 2: of just computers and emails and how business is done
Speaker 2: electronically tapping your phone to pay that these things were
Speaker 2: unheard of twenty thirty years ago, so now it's just.
Speaker 1: Part of that day living. I remember the days, and
Speaker 1: you might. When I first started, it was manual typewriters,
Speaker 1: and then when the electronic typewriters came in, there was
Speaker 1: a couple of old detectives that why would they need
Speaker 1: an electronic typewriter? And then these stupid things computers came
Speaker 1: in that would never catch on.
Speaker 2: That's right. Yeah, it doesn't feel like it was that
Speaker 2: long ago, and probably in the scheme of things it wasn't.
Speaker 2: But that highlights I guess how rapid this is changing,
Speaker 2: and it's another technological change that's going to happen really
Speaker 2: quick in the next couple of years to five years,
Speaker 2: and we may look back in ten and almost laugh
Speaker 2: at some of these days.
Speaker 1: Yeah, whatether you've been doing since you've been out of
Speaker 1: the police. You've spent twenty seven years in the Victorian
Speaker 1: Police working as a detective. How long you've been out
Speaker 1: and what you've been doing.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well it was actually four years ago last week,
Speaker 2: so that's gone really quickly. Took me a couple of
Speaker 2: years to really find myself again and that identity that
Speaker 2: we've probably spoken of many times, but I eventually got
Speaker 2: around to start in my own company, Paragrine Investigations and Consultancy,
Speaker 2: and in that space where you're looking at risk and
Speaker 2: security for the private sector, but also some private investigations
Speaker 2: on that higher end scale of finding people, of finding
Speaker 2: people that don't want to be found. Thanks to some
Speaker 2: previous stuff with obviously Channel ten.
Speaker 1: And just for the listeners that don't know that, I'm
Speaker 1: also sitting opposite a TV star in part because you're
Speaker 1: on the After you left The Left the Cops, you
Speaker 1: were on the show called the Hunted.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right. Hunted came in to our screens a
Speaker 2: couple of years ago now and that's what led me
Speaker 2: to part of this work. So the people I met
Speaker 2: through Hunted as now who I work with and collaborate
Speaker 2: with in the private sector. So it's amazing how these
Speaker 2: doors open up.
Speaker 1: And the premise of that show was someone just citizens.
Speaker 1: It was a reality TV show, but was based on
Speaker 1: the ability of law enforcement to track down people that
Speaker 1: were on the runt.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well we did just about day and day out
Speaker 2: in the job. But here regular citizens thought they'd give
Speaker 2: it a go, try and avoid us, and they had
Speaker 2: twenty one days to try and avoid the team of
Speaker 2: hunters for the reality show and a lot of fun.
Speaker 2: But just amazing.
Speaker 1: Did that upscale you like what was available? People often
Speaker 1: assume that law enforcement is a cutting edge, but you know,
Speaker 1: when technology changes, sometimes law enforcements a little bit.
Speaker 2: It sure did. The team that was put together in
Speaker 2: the cyber aspect, So everything that was to do with
Speaker 2: cyber whether it was online, open source, dark web, spoofing
Speaker 2: on different machines and trying to pretend or trick the
Speaker 2: people at the other end as to who they were.
Speaker 2: It was a whole new world to me. And like
Speaker 2: we've just said, I had to learn and learn really
Speaker 2: quick and that's obviously led me on to now what
Speaker 2: I do in the private sector with Peregrine.
Speaker 1: Okay, you've been on the podcast before and we talked
Speaker 1: about your career and that, but just for people that
Speaker 1: hadn't listened to that episode, just give us a bit
Speaker 1: by way of background your policing career when you're in
Speaker 1: Victoria and the police.
Speaker 2: Yeah for sure. So just over twenty seven years in
Speaker 2: the end before I called time on that went through
Speaker 2: all the ranks as usual, up from working the van
Speaker 2: in the streets of Melbourne and then finally into the
Speaker 2: crime squads with a little bit of time at homicide,
Speaker 2: robbery and sex offense child abuse units. Two thousand and
Speaker 2: nine made them move up to the bush up to
Speaker 2: Wodonga up on the border with New South Wales. Ran
Speaker 2: the detective's office up there. Then about the next ten
Speaker 2: years through Black sat Day, Black Summer and all the
Speaker 2: different events we had up there, and that's where I
Speaker 2: still am. Yeah, I love it.
Speaker 1: Okay, Well, we won't revisit your police career, but if
Speaker 1: people want to hear about your police career, you had
Speaker 1: some fascinating cases and a lot of stories to tell.
Speaker 1: The career police tend to tend to carry with them.
Speaker 1: Another thing that you are doing is you're very much
Speaker 1: involved in the advocacy for veteran police. Yeah, what made
Speaker 1: evaded you for that?
Speaker 2: I think, as I sort of alluded to before that
Speaker 2: first couple of years out for me, I was struggling,
Speaker 2: and it was around those COVID times or post COVID,
Speaker 2: We're just trying to find your identity again. People would
Speaker 2: ask what do you do for work? And I struggled
Speaker 2: to come up with an answer and how I felt
Speaker 2: because you know, I used to be a police officer
Speaker 2: or I'm not sure what.
Speaker 1: It was funny that because that is your identity, and
Speaker 1: I think that's what a lot of people struggle with
Speaker 1: because you go through life and regardless of everything else
Speaker 1: you do or even your life, you're identified as a policeman.
Speaker 1: That becomes your identity. So I do understand what you're saying.
Speaker 2: Exactly right, So that you know that journey in that
Speaker 2: couple of years, which was pretty rough, you know, some
Speaker 2: highs and lows, but come out the other side eventually.
Speaker 2: With that, I then saw so many mates and you
Speaker 2: would too, that are going through the same thing and
Speaker 2: almost the same issues. Of that local identity, loss of identity,
Speaker 2: I should say, you know, what's my purpose now? Because
Speaker 2: your purpose was to serve your community, serve your state,
Speaker 2: and you had your team and I guess you tribe
Speaker 2: around you. And when that's gone, who am I now?
Speaker 2: So I saw so many people struggling with that. And
Speaker 2: it was around the same time as Police Veterans Victoria
Speaker 2: kicked off sort of a new initiative to fill that gap,
Speaker 2: because if you didn't go out on work cover, or
Speaker 2: if you didn't go out physically or mentally, well, you
Speaker 2: sort of went into a different bucket of no man's
Speaker 2: land of just you gone.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so there's no context.
Speaker 2: Yeah, So the Police Veterans Victoria was starting. I think
Speaker 2: a lot of states are doing a similar thing. So
Speaker 2: start to work with them around helping people that were
Speaker 2: getting out. So we now either help those that are
Speaker 2: transitioning out or we help sort of the very senior
Speaker 2: people in their later stages of life that are struggling,
Speaker 2: but they could connect with us because we understand, we
Speaker 2: understand what it was like to work in the job,
Speaker 2: and we just help them through life and the simple
Speaker 2: things that they might be struggling with. Finances, or struggling
Speaker 2: with relationships, and we just just sit down and have
Speaker 2: a coffee with them and have a chat. So I
Speaker 2: really enjoy that.
Speaker 1: I think it's worthwhile in that. And I speak with
Speaker 1: a lot of military guys, and you know, they spend
Speaker 1: twelve months going through their basic training and turning them
Speaker 1: into soldiers and becoming part of the military, and then
Speaker 1: when they leave, they're just cut off. Same with police.
Speaker 1: We go through the academy and they're breaking you down
Speaker 1: and rolling you out as a cop. It would be
Speaker 1: and I don't think it'll be that expense ive just
Speaker 1: the last couple of months of anyone's career, if they're
Speaker 1: going out at their own time, wouldn't it be good
Speaker 1: if they did a decompression basically before they helped them
Speaker 1: on the little things that you need to be up after.
Speaker 2: You've left the police, It's right, all those things about
Speaker 2: just starting your own business or what's that next step,
Speaker 2: whether it's another full time role or you start your
Speaker 2: own business. Just all those little things on life that
Speaker 2: are outside the job can be a lot for some people.
Speaker 2: So yeah, it's needed. There's a gap there for sure,
Speaker 2: and I think there's a lot of good space some
Speaker 2: programs beyond the badge and the police veterans do do
Speaker 2: a lot of work, but there's more that can be done,
Speaker 2: that's for sure.
Speaker 1: Well good on you for putting some effort in there.
Speaker 1: And I know in the conversations that I had with
Speaker 1: you too, you were touched by the murder of the
Speaker 1: two police officers down in Victoria recently. You knew one
Speaker 1: of them very well.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well that's that's the area I worked in, so
Speaker 2: you know, the Wangaratta areas. You know, we would work
Speaker 2: with them almost daily, if not weekly, of working alongside
Speaker 2: some of those guys, and you know, very sad to
Speaker 2: watch that, and that's part of that, you know, grief
Speaker 2: process as well that you know had. I had a
Speaker 2: real sort of personal struggle with I'm out but I
Speaker 2: want to help, but you have I've had to step
Speaker 2: away and how can I help in other ways? And
Speaker 2: it was just sort of a few messages here and
Speaker 2: there to people say, you know, if you need to
Speaker 2: have a chat, I'm here, do your best, but look
Speaker 2: after yourself as well. So you're really close to home
Speaker 2: that one, and we'll be for obviously a long.
Speaker 1: Time because that's the type of situation especially in the
Speaker 1: small community and the rural area. That would hit very hard.
Speaker 1: Everyone with the people.
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly everyone you knew someone and the people that
Speaker 2: responded to, right from ambulance to police to the community,
Speaker 2: the pubs and just the local businesses that are affected
Speaker 2: by that search and still are. Yeah, it's really tough.
Speaker 2: And once that noise sort of stops and things sort
Speaker 2: of start to die down a little, that's where the
Speaker 2: real struggle can really come in, and that's when people's
Speaker 2: mental well being can care the focus.
Speaker 1: It's just that stage you're going through the grief and
Speaker 1: then the focus of dealing with it, and then all
Speaker 1: of a sudden that goes quiet and you're left to
Speaker 1: your own thoughts.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a dangerous time. So that's the time I
Speaker 2: like to step in a little bit more than a
Speaker 2: bit closer and how you're really going, how you're doing
Speaker 2: because that noise has stopped.
Speaker 1: Okay, all right, Well, AI is a topic of discussion today,
Speaker 1: and quite iron I've used AI to get a description.
Speaker 2: Of what AI is.
Speaker 1: So I'm going to read this out and then we'll
Speaker 1: just for those that don't know AI, this is the
Speaker 1: way AI describes itself. AI or Artificial intelligence is the
Speaker 1: ability of computer systems to form tasks that typically require
Speaker 1: human intelligence, such as learning, problem solving, decision making, and
Speaker 1: understanding language. It is a field of computer science that
Speaker 1: uses algorithms and data to enable machines to perceive their environment,
Speaker 1: learn from experiences, and make decisions or take actions to
Speaker 1: achieve goals. AI can be found in everyday applications like
Speaker 1: virtual assistance, recommendation systems and advance web search engines. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's AI's definition of AI. There's a lot there, and
Speaker 1: my thinking that's describing what we as a human do
Speaker 1: with our brain exactly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and that's I guess that artificial intelligence piece isn't AI.
Speaker 2: So yeah, but it's only as good as what develops
Speaker 2: on itself. So as it sort of alluded to, it's
Speaker 2: doing large analysis of data or problems that the human
Speaker 2: brain or the human would take hours and hours and hours,
Speaker 2: if not days a week to do, and it'll do
Speaker 2: it rapidly in seconds.
Speaker 1: Well, using a basic example, if we were talking, if
Speaker 1: we keep it related to a crime or a court matter,
Speaker 1: if case law, a particular type of case law and
Speaker 1: precedence is very heavily relied upon in court case law,
Speaker 1: what's a statue? What are the proofs of certain offense?
Speaker 1: All that is readily available on AI, that's right. And
Speaker 1: before that would be a case of we all had
Speaker 1: those old law books that we'd keep in our office
Speaker 1: and have the actives looking through case law trying to
Speaker 1: work out what way to approach an investigation or present
Speaker 1: a matter at court. It's incredible what's readily available the fingertips.
Speaker 2: That's right, and it's so reallyvailable. But then it's a
Speaker 2: matter of also then interpreting that to your case or
Speaker 2: your particular set of circumstances. So yeah, it's great to
Speaker 2: be able to draw that data in from so many
Speaker 2: volumes of the back walls or fill with those books
Speaker 2: that we talked of, where would you go to find that?
Speaker 2: Whereas the AI can take you straight to the piece that
Speaker 2: you need, that piece of legislation or the case law,
Speaker 2: and then you, as a human element, can apply that
Speaker 2: to your case or your situation. So it just saves
Speaker 2: you so much time. And I actually swear by now
Speaker 2: and obviously now that's part of my world.
Speaker 1: Well, like going through the detect this course, and I
Speaker 1: would imagine it would have been very similar for you.
Speaker 1: A lot of it was learning virtually parrot form about
Speaker 1: the Crimes Act. Yeah, the proofs of the fence, that
Speaker 1: type of thing just drummed into you, so you knew
Speaker 1: what it was. Now that's readily available.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no excuse now to miss an element of a
Speaker 2: charge or a point of proof to prove a case.
Speaker 2: It's all there, ready to go. And I guess that's
Speaker 2: part of where AI could be used to assist going
Speaker 2: forward in that next step of what does this look
Speaker 2: like for investigators?
Speaker 1: So when we talk AI like, I think you can
Speaker 1: have the conversation on the street now on ninety percent
Speaker 1: that people know what you're talking about and acknowledge their
Speaker 1: views in some form. But when has that sort of
Speaker 1: come come in the favor.
Speaker 2: I think on the last couple of years it really
Speaker 2: everyone sort of embraced the idea because it's been everywhere,
Speaker 2: whether it's you know, your chat GPT to help draft
Speaker 2: things or research things. We've seen it within the school.
Speaker 2: I don't think my sixteen year old daughter will use
Speaker 2: chat GPT from how and again for some stuff, But
Speaker 2: you know it's I think we've really sent the last
Speaker 2: couple of years and people are starting to obviously lean
Speaker 2: into that a bit more and scratch a bit deeper
Speaker 2: than just saying, oh, AI AI is everything. AI can
Speaker 2: be everything, but it actually you need to look at
Speaker 2: what is the problem or what is issue I'm looking
Speaker 2: to solve here? What do I want AI for? That's
Speaker 2: probably the key point, because you know, you can't just say,
Speaker 2: let's just great AI into investigations. Well, what part of
Speaker 2: an investigation do you want to look at how it's
Speaker 2: come into play? Yes, So that's the broader question that
Speaker 2: needs a lot more thought, And there's so many elements
Speaker 2: to it, Yeah, which I'm sure we'll go through.
Speaker 1: But it's someone bought up and that it was going
Speaker 1: back probably twelve months or so, and it was someone
Speaker 1: sitting here that we're talking about how AI could be used,
Speaker 1: and there was a case where the courts rejected it
Speaker 1: because you know, and I can't remember the specific offense,
Speaker 1: but if a police officer had reasonable cause to stop
Speaker 1: and detain a person police officers, So what was acting
Speaker 1: on my mind at the time, And someone answered that
Speaker 1: I did because it wasn't facial identification, but something came
Speaker 1: up from a computer system, so the police officer was
Speaker 1: being cross examined by the barrister breaking it down so
Speaker 1: you didn't have reasonable cause and break it down to
Speaker 1: the point where the officer said, well, actually I didn't,
Speaker 1: but I had it based on that. Then the matter
Speaker 1: was was thrown out.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well yeah, at what point did you form your
Speaker 2: opinion or your belief? Well, I didn't form.
Speaker 1: It what was based on Yeah, So chat GPT, I've
Speaker 1: embraced it in the past, i'd say twelve months. But
Speaker 1: explain to people what that is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well chat GPT is I guess, a whole large
Speaker 2: system of data that's worldwide, but it is. It's not Australian,
Speaker 2: so it's obviously has a bias towards that Western world,
Speaker 2: but not particularly Australia. But you can ask it anything.
Speaker 2: You can ask it to write you a script for
Speaker 2: a book or a movie, right you write you a novel,
Speaker 2: write you emails, or ask about the pyramids. And it's
Speaker 2: just a large data set of all the information basically
Speaker 2: that draws off the wear or whatever data is actually
Speaker 2: put into it. So yeah, it's very broad, but you
Speaker 2: can just about ask it to do anything or produce anything,
Speaker 2: produce a photo, produce a recording and anything. So it's
Speaker 2: the sky's limit.
Speaker 1: With my reluctance to use it, and I pay homage
Speaker 1: to my son, and he dragged me into the world
Speaker 1: about using chat GPT. I argue that it feels like
Speaker 1: it's cheating, like it was to do a report, like
Speaker 1: a report on something. It might be a report to
Speaker 1: a council about something. He's gone, you can do that
Speaker 1: on chat GPT and what are you talking about, Like,
Speaker 1: I know how to do reports, and he posed a
Speaker 1: hypothetical question. We put it to chat GPT and I'm
Speaker 1: reading it. Jesus, that's done it better than I could.
Speaker 1: And my reluctance was so I argued, back, game, but
Speaker 1: that's cheating, Like I want to do it. I'm capable
Speaker 1: of doing it. And he said he said these words
Speaker 1: to me, and it sort of resonated with me and
Speaker 1: changed my thinking on it. He said, when you went
Speaker 1: to university and did you degree, well, you were relying
Speaker 1: on textbooks to get information. And then as it evolved,
Speaker 1: will you relying on the internet to get information to
Speaker 1: help with it? Well, this is just the next step.
Speaker 1: It's evolved. So you're not going to embrace technology. You
Speaker 1: stick with your textbook stat you'll go really really good
Speaker 1: if you can find the many Moore. That is how
Speaker 1: it's evolved, isn't. It's something that we've got to embrace.
Speaker 1: There's no ethical or moral issue against using the available technology.
Speaker 2: No, I don't think so, and I think it's time
Speaker 2: saving for me. I embrace it almost every day. And
Speaker 2: as you said, it's writing either report or writing an email.
Speaker 2: It could be absolutely anything, but it's that time saving
Speaker 2: of yes, you can write it, but it spits it
Speaker 2: out to you in a format that you can just
Speaker 2: about cut and paste into your email or your document,
Speaker 2: but you still fact check it. I think past some
Speaker 2: of those issues where people have been caught out is
Speaker 2: these large reports that might be a couple hundred pages.
Speaker 2: You've got to have that human lens across it to
Speaker 2: check it and put in your own style. So I
Speaker 2: know how I like to write and draft things. And
Speaker 2: it depends on who your audience is. If you know
Speaker 2: that person, so you add your personal lens, or if
Speaker 2: it's to counsel, then you add your facts. But you're
Speaker 2: just fact checking and it just saves so much time.
Speaker 2: So that report that you probably would have written yourself
Speaker 2: may have taken thirty minutes. To an hour or so
Speaker 2: to really your.
Speaker 1: Head round the structure, because that's that's the slow part
Speaker 1: of once I've got the structure in my head or
Speaker 1: I'm seeing it on paper. Yeah, that's why I've got
Speaker 1: to address and that that's what that provided I've had,
Speaker 1: I've used it and tested it. I was looking at
Speaker 1: a particular investigation and looking at the people involved, and
Speaker 1: it came back with the wrong names, like I knew
Speaker 1: the investigator involved or the detective involved, and I asked
Speaker 1: the question that came back and I corrected and said,
Speaker 1: well that person wasn't even involved in that case. I
Speaker 1: got back up. We're sorry, we'll correct that. So there
Speaker 1: are failings of it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, for sure. Yeah, and that's the I guess my
Speaker 2: main point to those I talked about this, Yeah, you
Speaker 2: must fact check it. You must look at it and
Speaker 2: have a good read of what it is. So you
Speaker 2: can't just cnut paste and send. You'll get caught out.
Speaker 2: And I think there's already been some pretty large organizations
Speaker 2: in that space. We won't talk about that, but yeah,
Speaker 2: it's a tool, and I think if the more efficient
Speaker 2: and effective you can using that tool, it just adds value.
Speaker 1: That's what I'm finding I think you talk about people
Speaker 1: getting called out. I think there was a barrister that
Speaker 1: was closing submissions and citing and it was identified that
Speaker 1: those cases don't even exist. So clearly he or she
Speaker 1: embraced that using that AI to present a closing argument,
Speaker 1: which I'm sure it could do very well. But you
Speaker 1: do need to fact check over it, don't you You do?
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right, and otherwise are very embarrassing if not
Speaker 2: the implications there. Yeah, that's pretty embarrassing professionally, but yeah,
Speaker 2: you got a fact check. You've got to look at
Speaker 2: what it is. But for me, it's about saving that time.
Speaker 2: It's not having to worry about the structure. Yeah, particularly
Speaker 2: for the larger pieces. So yeah, it's a great benefit
Speaker 2: to me day to day.
Speaker 1: Looking at let's pick one aspect of AI, how it
Speaker 1: could be used in criminal investigations. A large part of
Speaker 1: our work as police officers were locating. Invariably you're looking
Speaker 1: for the offender, it could be the victim you're looking for,
Speaker 1: or even witnesses. Facial identification. Where are we at with that?
Speaker 2: Yeah? So facial recognition technology or FRT well advanced globally,
Speaker 2: we're a bit behind the eight ball here in Australia
Speaker 2: and we're finding a bit of that is the case
Speaker 2: across the park. But it's well advanced. It's actually really
Speaker 2: accurate these days, but it's as only as good as
Speaker 2: what you can put into it. So again, like we've experienced,
Speaker 2: you get your CCTV back of your drive by shooting
Speaker 2: or your people that have run away from committing their murder,
Speaker 2: and you might have some really ordinary footage. That's the
Speaker 2: point where I can hopefully step up me to clean
Speaker 2: it up, and then I guess run that facial recognition
Speaker 2: technology across data sets that are already available, and that's
Speaker 2: the gap that is needed. So you remember in the
Speaker 2: days you'd actually to put your circular out across around
Speaker 2: the police.
Speaker 1: Came up in the front over the front cat owner
Speaker 1: of the police stations, in the detective's office, and.
Speaker 2: I think if I never had one result, because it
Speaker 2: was fresh in that that investigator's mind, I put that guy, yeah,
Speaker 2: in last week, that's this fellow. But out of twenty
Speaker 2: seven years, that's one. So asking people to do that internally,
Speaker 2: but then we've seen the amount of times you would
Speaker 2: then ask the public because it's your last resort we
Speaker 2: need to find this person and putting that face image
Speaker 2: out to the public, and that that has its own
Speaker 2: inherent issues, doesn't it. So you get everyone ringing.
Speaker 1: In the false sightings.
Speaker 2: Yeah, different things. You know, I know that person and
Speaker 2: you end up with another hundred crime stoppers investigation reports
Speaker 2: that you have to go into.
Speaker 1: How accurate it is it? Like, obviously a picture of
Speaker 1: my face if I was seen walking down the main
Speaker 1: street of Sydney, is it that capacity that they could say, oh,
Speaker 1: if you're looking for jubilant, he was in the main
Speaker 1: street of Sydney.
Speaker 2: Hours agoinndred percent Yeah and some and we talked about
Speaker 2: time and saving. It's very accurate. And that's what I
Speaker 2: mean by globally it's there.
Speaker 1: What's it go from? The the measurements between the eyes,
Speaker 1: the type of the noose, everything. Yeah, so many different
Speaker 1: points identification.
Speaker 2: And you come through like you do as you come
Speaker 2: through customs and that's the FRT technology piece. But how
Speaker 2: you then put that into investigations is the tricky bit
Speaker 2: because you need to know if you're going to be
Speaker 2: comparing against other systems, whether it's driver's licenses or your
Speaker 2: corrections photos. They're the data sets you want to compare against.
Speaker 2: But there's the ethical aspects and the privacy concerns that
Speaker 2: go with that. So that's that's probably the piece that
Speaker 2: still needs to be plugged in here in Australia.
Speaker 1: We're going to protect people's private yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2: And that's the issue where if we're using some of
Speaker 2: these systems that are offshore, you're sending an image of
Speaker 2: someone that is one of our citizens that may or
Speaker 2: may not be your accused. We're sending that offshore overseas. Right,
Speaker 2: that's what needs to be more sovereign based, and it
Speaker 2: needs to be developed here for here, for our culture,
Speaker 2: for our country.
Speaker 1: And what's the dangers of that? You said we need
Speaker 1: as a sovereign system and we need police to have
Speaker 1: the proper authority or law enforcement to have the proper authority,
Speaker 1: Like we don't want law enforcement to know every every
Speaker 1: movement you'll make, correct, So what's how does that? How
Speaker 1: does that work? Do law enforcement need their own system
Speaker 1: or what's the how do we protect.
Speaker 2: Or that that? You just led me straight into what
Speaker 2: my business is. So thank you, So I fed the
Speaker 2: music play. Look, there's a number of aspects there. Number
Speaker 2: one's ethics and there are nine principles that the Australia
Speaker 2: and New Zealand Policing Advisory Agency have given to all
Speaker 2: law enforcement across the country. Those nine principles are trying
Speaker 2: to raiw them all off the top of my head,
Speaker 2: but ethics, accountability and so many different finite points that
Speaker 2: exactly what we're talking about protecting the community's interests. But
Speaker 2: there's also the law enforcement site. Community expects us to
Speaker 2: catch your murderers, catch your sexual offenders, so that in
Speaker 2: that regard, it's got to be built in my view
Speaker 2: here for here, because we don't want our data system,
Speaker 2: particularly a government data system, being offshore. We can't raise
Speaker 2: so many issues, doesn't it security? National security, individual security?
Speaker 2: So if it's built here for here, we've got more
Speaker 2: control of it so it can be independently audited. You
Speaker 2: can actually have a conversation with the people that are
Speaker 2: building those large models and develop it for our bias.
Speaker 2: So if we're putting in a bias that has an
Speaker 2: American or a UK lens, then you may be drawing
Speaker 2: in UK case law or looking at American systems or
Speaker 2: American footage. You need to plug it into what is
Speaker 2: Australian and purely Australian, but you need the access to
Speaker 2: those data sets and that's where the nervousness is. So
Speaker 2: I'm already talking with some police forces and accompanied by
Speaker 2: the name of main Code and Dave Lemfords and his
Speaker 2: team at main Code that are building these massive data centers,
Speaker 2: incredible investment. We're talking millions and means of dollars of
Speaker 2: investment to have the data centers here in Australia, which
Speaker 2: is step number one.
Speaker 1: And in the data centers, they'd have all all that
Speaker 1: information captured and to access that it would be by application.
Speaker 1: If we were looking for a person that was wanted,
Speaker 1: we would track their phone, but invariably you needed authority
Speaker 1: to track the phone. You need the approval from the
Speaker 1: core that it needed to be signed off at some level.
Speaker 1: Is that the type of safeguards you're talking about, because
Speaker 1: we don't need to track you with your phone now.
Speaker 1: But if I'm going where is that Graham, I need
Speaker 1: to speak to him about this matter and put it
Speaker 1: out there. Okay, he was here three hours ago, he's
Speaker 1: here right now and we go grab you. Is that
Speaker 1: the type of privacy that you're concerned that could be invaded?
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly right, and that's why it still needs to
Speaker 2: have a process, which I'm sure the e Safety Commissioner
Speaker 2: is looking at. It still needs to have a process
Speaker 2: of authority that needs to go through, so you need
Speaker 2: an independent order to look at. In our scenario, we're
Speaker 2: looking at independent orders to oversee in fairness to what
Speaker 2: we're trying to build. Not dissimilar to in Victorio's the
Speaker 2: Office of Police Integrity, so the OPI would overlook all.
Speaker 1: We have the equivalent of le here in New South Wales.
Speaker 2: Yeah, So that's the level of trust that people need
Speaker 2: to have in any system that's going to be built.
Speaker 2: It's very difficult to have that trust if you're going
Speaker 2: to build it off Suore. So we build it here
Speaker 2: for here and independently ordered by Australians. But in answer
Speaker 2: to your question, I guess in my view, crimes against
Speaker 2: the person, so your homicides are robberie are.
Speaker 1: The things that we should be able to access it for.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they're the things that I think our community would
Speaker 2: expect us to be able to act on. But you
Speaker 2: ought to be able to plug into these systems. So
Speaker 2: in the scenario, if you're just wandering down circular key
Speaker 2: or wandering down Burke Street, Melbourne. You need to be
Speaker 2: able to plug into those systems and that's where the
Speaker 2: collaboration and partnership needs.
Speaker 1: Are they government systems or because businesses have their CCTV
Speaker 1: the licensed premises, Every business has cameras. There are we
Speaker 1: talking about gathering all that information or only government authorized ones?
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a great question, and I guess it depends
Speaker 2: on the appetite on how far it goes. So some
Speaker 2: are privately run. Obviously, the City of Melbourne runs the
Speaker 2: Safe City Center cameras in Victoria, but Victoria police already
Speaker 2: have access to that life. Again, it's about doing it smarter.
Speaker 2: So if you are looking for someone that's just committed
Speaker 2: a very serious crime, we need to know where this
Speaker 2: person is now. They've just fired a shot through some
Speaker 2: building in middle of Melbourne. Here's the image, we've got it.
Speaker 2: It's just going to expedite things. So rather than trying
Speaker 2: to look at phone records or a triangulation that can
Speaker 2: be a little bit accurate, if you can plug that
Speaker 2: into that system, it will Using the facial recognition technology,
Speaker 2: it does have the capacity to find them immediately and
Speaker 2: then alert us where that person.
Speaker 1: Is how are this then with people going on the
Speaker 1: run in this people often ask me that you know,
Speaker 1: and you've got the alleged shooting by Desmond Freeman that
Speaker 1: it's been months that they're looking for. But the type
Speaker 1: of technology we're talking about now is only applicable to
Speaker 1: the environment, and if he's in the bush, that we
Speaker 1: haven't got that advantage.
Speaker 2: No, that's right, and that's why I think they're brought
Speaker 2: in and I'm not that close to what I think
Speaker 2: they're brought in thermal imaguring and different things into that area.
Speaker 2: But look, I worked up there for so many years
Speaker 2: and you were doing searches for people that were lost
Speaker 2: and they wanted to be found and we couldn't find them.
Speaker 1: To count it rough and yeah, desolate, it's.
Speaker 2: Just so vast, so's it's a challenging time. But look,
Speaker 2: I'm just so glad that they're continuing that search and
Speaker 2: continue to fight to bring into justice.
Speaker 1: Oh well, they're putting all the resources in. Then he
Speaker 1: needs we need to find out what's happened and where
Speaker 1: he is, where he's still with us or if he's
Speaker 1: if he's not.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but you raise a good point, and people out there,
Speaker 2: would you know, that's my it's my right to aout
Speaker 2: to walk around the city without being tracked by the government.
Speaker 2: I guess the lens that we're I'm trying to put
Speaker 2: on and hopefully we get to the point is the
Speaker 2: systems won't be bothered by you. It's looking for the
Speaker 2: person that's just done the drive by shooting, or committed
Speaker 2: the murder, or committed the sexual assault. And of course
Speaker 2: everyone agreed we want that person court. That's the piece
Speaker 2: that needs to come in here, not tracking everyone single movements,
Speaker 2: and that's the lens of auditing those systems to make
Speaker 2: sure that they're being accessed appropriately. No different to any
Speaker 2: of the systems we've gone through in policing, where you know,
Speaker 2: if you access it for the wrong reason, high chance
Speaker 2: you'll lose your job.
Speaker 1: Are we in a situation like the way AI is
Speaker 1: rapidly evolving? That really sickly people? The government, big brother
Speaker 1: will know where each and every one of us are
Speaker 1: at any time.
Speaker 2: Well, if you're commuted a serious crime, yeah, yeah, so Look,
Speaker 2: it's hard to The more urban we are, the more
Speaker 2: you're going to you're going to go onto.
Speaker 1: Counter I think from yeah, I look at my day today,
Speaker 1: I come here in my phone would be pinging off towers.
Speaker 1: I go and use a credit card at the store.
Speaker 1: They know I'm there. My car goes through down the road.
Speaker 1: There's images of that. It's pretty much where we're at now, isn't.
Speaker 2: It's right, it's there now, and that's where a I
Speaker 2: will expedite that and bring it all together. So like
Speaker 2: a definition at the start was taking large sets of
Speaker 2: data large it's information pulling it all together. There's already
Speaker 2: AI out there that you know, the old case of
Speaker 2: either an armed robber or something, you'll go to twenty
Speaker 2: thirty different places and get all their CCTV. You collect
Speaker 2: it all because you don't want it to get lost.
Speaker 2: Some systems rewright after a week or a month, and
Speaker 2: you don't want to be two months down the track
Speaker 2: and go, oh gosh, they actually dumped the gun in
Speaker 2: a being around the corner.
Speaker 1: You want and timely, and it was time consuming going
Speaker 1: and going through that.
Speaker 2: So there is AI already of al that you can
Speaker 2: get all of those thirty different businesses cameras that might
Speaker 2: Fragument's sake have ten cameras each. There's three hundred cameras
Speaker 2: you've got to go through well and all all of
Speaker 2: that time.
Speaker 1: I remember how time consuming that was. We'd grabbed great,
Speaker 1: we've got footage from ten CCTV cameras, but it would
Speaker 1: take weeks to go through.
Speaker 2: And how do we give that job too or you know,
Speaker 2: you had to go through it all yourself, And that's
Speaker 2: that's the piece, that's the saving of times, so you
Speaker 2: can prevent the next time robbery or of a next
Speaker 2: sexual assault because you're straight onto that person's identity much
Speaker 2: faster than you would have been if you're trying to
Speaker 2: go through it all yourself.
Speaker 1: The argument, and I've heard this argument when we talk fingerprints,
Speaker 1: I hear in DNA when DNA evolved and that, and
Speaker 1: people would go, you know, like there was a suggestion
Speaker 1: that fingerprints and DNA should be taken from everyone because
Speaker 1: people assume we've got fingerprints of everyone. We don't necessarily
Speaker 1: have fingerprints of anyone. They've got to have come before
Speaker 1: the system with DNA, Like why not get everyone's DNA
Speaker 1: on the day that they're born. Why not get everyone's fingerprints?
Speaker 1: Everything like that, And people would often say, well, I've
Speaker 1: got nothing to hide, I don't care if people know.
Speaker 1: I was of that view earlier. Maybe throughout my police career,
Speaker 1: I didn't give it a lot of thought. Since I've
Speaker 1: left the police, and certainly you know the battles I've
Speaker 1: had with court system and taken on Big Brother, it
Speaker 1: does sort of, it does scare me. And so what
Speaker 1: I'm saying that public opinion will Who cares? If you
Speaker 1: don't do nothing wrong, You've got nothing to hide. But
Speaker 1: there is an aspect of an invasion of privacy that
Speaker 1: I'm not not comfortable with.
Speaker 2: I got to agree with you with that. I'm exactly
Speaker 2: the saying through my policing career, if you'm not only wrong,
Speaker 2: what have you got to worry about? Yeah, But now
Speaker 2: on the other side of the fence, I think it's
Speaker 2: really it's more important to me to have that security
Speaker 2: that number one, you know, it's my information, it's my
Speaker 2: DNA to want it out there and just say taking
Speaker 2: on Big Brother, and we've seen errors in cases through DNA,
Speaker 2: We've seen errors in criminal cases. So it's important to
Speaker 2: have the integrity of these systems built right from the outset.
Speaker 2: If we're looking at AI, how it's built right.
Speaker 1: Well, it's interesting and that's been the theme of your
Speaker 1: discussion is about the integrity and the ethics involved in it,
Speaker 1: because it is something that could be abused. I think
Speaker 1: a lot of us felt aggrieved by the during the
Speaker 1: COVID times where everywhere you had the g you had
Speaker 1: the scan in, and that that frustrated me. I didn't
Speaker 1: like that because police or the government was saying, look,
Speaker 1: will not be used for anything other than tracking the
Speaker 1: COVID case, I'd say bullshit, because because I know if
Speaker 1: there was a murder, yeah, I would get access to
Speaker 1: that information. Where if I was looking for you during CAVID,
Speaker 1: then you'd scanned into such and such a place, we'd
Speaker 1: get that information.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well we had an example of that on the border.
Speaker 2: So we're on the border with New South Wales which
Speaker 2: is obviously closed, and we had a shooting in central Wodonga.
Speaker 2: We got the car really quickly because it was not
Speaker 2: much footage to go through. When we went, oh, we
Speaker 2: know what that car is, We put that information out
Speaker 2: to the checkpoint, bang got him ten minutes after the shooting.
Speaker 2: Different to scanning in somewhere. But big Brother was there
Speaker 2: the whole time, and I was very anxious about that
Speaker 2: that whole time, and I didn't enjoy the job at
Speaker 2: that time. I think a lot of cops went, you know,
Speaker 2: I didn't sign up for.
Speaker 1: This well down in Victoria and I saw it. I
Speaker 1: just got out of the police before the lockdowns happened.
Speaker 1: And yeah, I wouldn't have liked to be the police
Speaker 1: officer in those times. I think we were forced to
Speaker 1: enforce the law, which is our job and what we
Speaker 1: sign up to, but I don't think our hearts would
Speaker 1: have been in a lot of it. In the nine pm.
Speaker 2: Curfews, curfews trying to stop kids from playing in parks
Speaker 2: and oh my god, don't.
Speaker 1: Go the end of the beach. All right, Well, we
Speaker 1: could do a whole nother podcast with you and I
Speaker 1: winding about that. But yeah, it was that just to me,
Speaker 1: it showed how power corrupted it is.
Speaker 2: It's a really important piece of the discussion on development
Speaker 2: of AI and what does it mean. And that's again
Speaker 2: and so to go on about that's why it needs
Speaker 2: to be done here so we can control them. But
Speaker 2: and that was part of my passion of getting involved
Speaker 2: in the first place, because I could see a real
Speaker 2: need for it. But I can actually see how this
Speaker 2: can benefit saving so much time for investigators quickly identifying
Speaker 2: offenders to stop that second offense, but also help in
Speaker 2: the court process. You know, we've got horrendous weights and
Speaker 2: delays through court the lawyer piece on the other side
Speaker 2: for them to understand all the data information. There is
Speaker 2: a real space for it, but it's got to be
Speaker 2: developed ethically, morally, and I feel what better person to,
Speaker 2: I guess, develop it than someone that's been through it
Speaker 2: and lived it and knows what's needed.
Speaker 1: Hey, guys, it's Gary jubilin here. Want they get more
Speaker 1: out of VI Catch Killers, then you should head over
Speaker 1: to our new video feed on Spotify where you can
Speaker 1: watch every episode of VI Catch Killers. Just search for
Speaker 1: I Catch Killers video in your Spotify app and start
Speaker 1: watching today. Give me a sense of how it changes
Speaker 1: the way with approach a criminal investigation. And you know
Speaker 1: we're talking you have only left four years ago, so
Speaker 1: it's relatively recent. How do you see the potential for
Speaker 1: it to change criminal investigations.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'd probably give you a real basic case, so
Speaker 2: you know, a drive by shooting or a murder if
Speaker 2: you will, so to get away car. You get it
Speaker 2: on footage, so you know the initial action is always
Speaker 2: canvassing witnesses chemissing for CCTV, it's everywhere if it's urban.
Speaker 2: So you do get your piece of CCTV that has
Speaker 2: the car driving off at speed away from the shooting.
Speaker 2: We've sent it on TV a million times and you
Speaker 2: would have sat around the table in the office talking
Speaker 2: about is that a twenty nineteen hold in Commodore vs VX?
Speaker 2: What type of car is that? You need to identify
Speaker 2: exactly what it is. AI will be able to do that,
Speaker 2: and that's something we're looking at with Peregrim has been
Speaker 2: able to build a data set of vehicles. It's a
Speaker 2: known quantity. There's no it's not like a fingerprint where
Speaker 2: everyone has one. There's only so many models of vehicles
Speaker 2: in the world. So an AI program developed for law
Speaker 2: enforcement would quickly identify immediately that is a twenty nineteen
Speaker 2: hold in Commodore, certain model, the rims are changed or
Speaker 2: whatever aspect or whatever unique piece of that car is
Speaker 2: and it's one hundred percent accurate.
Speaker 1: See that it self would be beneficial. And you just
Speaker 1: brought me crashing back into my time in the told
Speaker 1: Up squad when we're always tracking cars and we would
Speaker 1: go to the manufacturer and this is what we've got
Speaker 1: then take a long time to get that and it
Speaker 1: was always opinion based. But you're saying with AI the
Speaker 1: right system bank, this is a car you're looking for.
Speaker 2: Well, it's a fixed data set, isn't it. So you
Speaker 2: know if you're loading in every single car that's ever
Speaker 2: been manufactured, it'll find it, and it'll find it quickly.
Speaker 2: So we know the power of knowing that piece of
Speaker 2: information investigation as early as possible is critical. And then
Speaker 2: we talked before about if you did not know that
Speaker 2: vehicle and you go to the media or the public
Speaker 2: about can you help us find this car or we're
Speaker 2: looking for this particular car, and if you get it wrong,
Speaker 2: you can' undo that.
Speaker 1: No, Well that was you had to hold back sometimes too,
Speaker 1: because if you put out the wrong one, okay.
Speaker 2: Well that's a real basic example of and that can
Speaker 2: then change your tactics. So if you've quickly identified the car,
Speaker 2: if you quickly identified what make a model it is,
Speaker 2: you may then be able to look at the identity
Speaker 2: of that vehicle, whether it's the red j O and
Speaker 2: plug it in. But then you can track it across
Speaker 2: where it went from there. So there's a lot that
Speaker 2: can change in that simple example of just that one
Speaker 2: piece of knowledge of knowing the make and model.
Speaker 1: If you get away car, okay, I can see the
Speaker 1: benefits there. And if we can get and the old adages,
Speaker 1: get the police out on the streets where we need them.
Speaker 1: And I see in Victoria, I heard them say that
Speaker 1: they're bringing in a policy where they're going to have
Speaker 1: more public servants doing work than police have done. The
Speaker 1: free up the police because they're struggling with I think
Speaker 1: that's a good idea. Maybe if we embrace AI in
Speaker 1: law enforcement and don't quite often I found in law
Speaker 1: enforcement and you would have seen this too. When technology
Speaker 1: changes invariably we wait a little bit. Yes, then we're
Speaker 1: reaching out to the experts outside the police. Can you
Speaker 1: give us a hand? It'd be good if police got
Speaker 1: on the front foot, law enforcement got them on the
Speaker 1: front foot.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, And that's I think the trigger point at
Speaker 2: the moment is without telling government or police and what
Speaker 2: they need to do. Now I lived on the other side,
Speaker 2: you can't do it on your own one funding, it's
Speaker 2: not cheap. And show me a government that's got millions
Speaker 2: of dollars to invest in AI for their own system.
Speaker 2: I've been at a few conferences lately around the frustrations
Speaker 2: that are shared by very senior police saying when is
Speaker 2: the corporate we going to help because it's needed, and
Speaker 2: that's I guess where we come in. And it's certainly
Speaker 2: not cheap. You know, if there's investors there that want
Speaker 2: to come on board and kive me your hand, that'd
Speaker 2: be great, but you've got to align yourself with the
Speaker 2: right people. This isn't about profit. It's about building something
Speaker 2: that will work for our community, to make it safer
Speaker 2: and as you say, make the investigators time more out
Speaker 2: on the road rather than behind a computer putting briefs
Speaker 2: of evidence together, going through CCTV, trying to identify a vehicle,
Speaker 2: or going through phone records, even those things, you know,
Speaker 2: hours and hours and hours at work to work through that.
Speaker 2: People think we have that already, the amount of conversations
Speaker 2: I have with corpus that don't the cops have this? Sorry, No,
Speaker 2: it's you know, it's funded through state governments and federal governments.
Speaker 2: It's a real challenge. So there are some partnership out there.
Speaker 2: I know monash Uni and Australian Federal Belief have an
Speaker 2: amazing program through the ALEX Labin Artificial intelligence for law
Speaker 2: enforcement community safety. They do an amazing amount of work
Speaker 2: around the trail exploitation and trailed sexual material online. They're
Speaker 2: using AI to help with that, which is fantastic because
Speaker 2: it protects our kids. But there's more pieces if you're done,
Speaker 2: and that sort of circles all the way around to
Speaker 2: AI can be anything. But you've got to find out
Speaker 2: what is the problem you want to solve. And it's
Speaker 2: the same in law enforcement. You've got to pick what's
Speaker 2: going to be the most effective and efficient way to
Speaker 2: probably save time, which is cost of cops out on
Speaker 2: the street, and understand why they're employing public servants because
Speaker 2: the endgame is you want to have more visible.
Speaker 1: Presence and at the risk of losing listeners because it's
Speaker 1: so boring and I know you would have found it boring.
Speaker 1: But the admin side of policing, even to the point
Speaker 1: of rostering, how much time that would take up. Now,
Speaker 1: AI like chat GPT could work out the roster so
Speaker 1: simply so we could three out administrative things like that.
Speaker 2: For sure, And and the cost in labor alone huge.
Speaker 2: There's there's you know, I'd hate to think how many
Speaker 2: cops are back out on the street.
Speaker 1: Well, handling of exhibits, tracking, and I know and I
Speaker 1: assume Victoria would have been the same that New South Wales.
Speaker 1: We upskilled on that because gone were the days of
Speaker 1: the old exhibit book And where is that missing exhibit type? Oh,
Speaker 1: that's right, it was in Grahams that's right.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: So all that should in fact free up police to
Speaker 1: do what police should be doing, and that's enforcing the
Speaker 1: law and investigating crimes when they'd occurred.
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly, And that's that's the point. I guess that's
Speaker 2: where we are at, this rural juncture of do we
Speaker 2: lean into it, do we trust it? And you've got
Speaker 2: to have the confidence and partner with the corporate to
Speaker 2: trust to build that. And there's a space that law
Speaker 2: enforcement are heavily involved in that for sure, but you've
Speaker 2: got to be able to fund it. And you know
Speaker 2: that's the big piece.
Speaker 1: It's not cheap and you need those checks and balances.
Speaker 1: And like when DNA came in, and I think it
Speaker 1: was early nineties and the first case, it was one
Speaker 1: of the early cases that DNA was used. It confused
Speaker 1: hell Adam the first start, it was a horrific murder
Speaker 1: of an elderly lady in her house and she'd been
Speaker 1: sexually assaulted. And we had a good suspect, and we
Speaker 1: got the suspects DNA and it didn't match, and that
Speaker 1: everything else was pointing this is a person. And eventually
Speaker 1: we got on to another person the DNA and there
Speaker 1: was no admissions from him initially, but the DNA told
Speaker 1: us this is a person you're looking for because seamen
Speaker 1: was left at the crime scene and it blew me
Speaker 1: away in that. Okay, we can charge a murder a
Speaker 1: person with murder based on this information. But that's how
Speaker 1: things evolve, isn't it correct?
Speaker 2: And that's what juries tend to expect. Now to where's
Speaker 2: the forensic evidence, where's the CCTV? How did we ever
Speaker 2: convict anyone before we had all this? We look now
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty five. If the case doesn't have DNA,
Speaker 2: it doesn't have a fingerprint, doesn't have an eyewitness identification.
Speaker 1: And if it's at scientifically based evidence, it's irrefutable. It
Speaker 1: carries a lot more weight with the jury. But we've
Speaker 1: got to be careful because is it Queensland. The laboratories
Speaker 1: it was having a lot of problems and it didn't
Speaker 1: stand up to the scrutiny. That's right, and that could
Speaker 1: be the case where we fall into the AI. Well
Speaker 1: if we don't make sure we have the proper standards
Speaker 1: and regulations.
Speaker 2: That's right, and that's why it's so critical to build purpose,
Speaker 2: purpose built.
Speaker 1: Data analysis and evidence gathering. A lot of the work
Speaker 1: on the complex investigations, particularly when I was in homicide
Speaker 1: and you worked homicide, you are overwhelmed with information that
Speaker 1: comes in, and that is the real struggle. You have
Speaker 1: to just sift through what's important and what's not. You
Speaker 1: get a good analyst and an analyst and the way
Speaker 1: that what I considered the good analyst in my time
Speaker 1: was someone that could retain information, could reach statements and
Speaker 1: pick up little pieces of there was a red car
Speaker 1: scene in this witness's statement. Someone else mentioned the red
Speaker 1: car in that street two weeks ago, These little things AI.
Speaker 1: I could see AI just freeing that up exactly.
Speaker 2: It's solving problems. It's understanding the data and understanding information.
Speaker 2: And if you're plugging all that information into your case
Speaker 2: and into your system, and you want to know whereas
Speaker 2: a red car mentioned every single time, and every witness
Speaker 2: statement or every bit of CCTV footage. It won't only
Speaker 2: just tell you where it is, it can timeline it
Speaker 2: for you, so you know, trying to put the chain
Speaker 2: of events and chain of circumstances of your case together
Speaker 2: when you're definitely tracking someone that's been over a matter
Speaker 2: of weeks in the lead up to something, or post
Speaker 2: conviction or post offense as well, it'll timeline it all
Speaker 2: that for you, which it will do it in seconds,
Speaker 2: but then you've got to validate and then you've got
Speaker 2: to check it. But it's removing those hours and hours
Speaker 2: and hours. And we're not just talking four or five hours.
Speaker 2: I think we've said before. You know, it's it's weeks,
Speaker 2: if not months, of putting a brief together.
Speaker 1: I still remember and that it was a hard time
Speaker 1: in policing. When I say hard, it was worthwhile. But
Speaker 1: it was sitting in an office for about four months
Speaker 1: on my own, going through a broof of evidence, reviewing
Speaker 1: an old homicide three kids. It was a serial killer,
Speaker 1: it was a bowerble one and reading statements that were
Speaker 1: taken in the nineties that weren't entered on computers, so
Speaker 1: you couldn't you couldn't use the computers to find the
Speaker 1: information and literally going through highlighting this and then have
Speaker 1: to keep my head around the whole investigation so I'm
Speaker 1: not missing anything. We didn't have an analyst attached to
Speaker 1: the investigation. In fact, I was the only one working
Speaker 1: on it. So it was literally sitting in a room
Speaker 1: for three to four months making notes and making sure
Speaker 1: I didn't miss any information. And I look back at
Speaker 1: something like that now, and that was it was my
Speaker 1: When I say mind, I mean it was just.
Speaker 2: Hard work hard. That's a hard slog.
Speaker 1: And that could be literally done in a matter of minutes.
Speaker 2: Correct one hundred percent can and actually then trying to
Speaker 2: identify where your gaps are or where you need to
Speaker 2: be if you can train it to think like an investigator.
Speaker 2: And that's probably I'm most worry about, is we don't
Speaker 2: then get lazy investigators. We're not twenty years down the
Speaker 2: track going. These teams can't think for themselves, they don't
Speaker 2: think outside the box. You've still got to have that skill.
Speaker 1: You bought up something that this is my silly mind
Speaker 1: ticking over. I learned how to do AFFI David's. I
Speaker 1: learned how to type up a fact sheet. I learned
Speaker 1: how to take a witness statement. That was the skills
Speaker 1: I believe I had as a detechnique. They were hard
Speaker 1: earned skills. It didn't come natural. It was trial and
Speaker 1: error and learning and experience and learning every day. Now
Speaker 1: to do a set of facts, you could, in fact,
Speaker 1: just put in brief information and ask the computer system
Speaker 1: AI to present a set of facts for the local court,
Speaker 1: or a set of facts for the district court, or
Speaker 1: this is going to the Supreme Court, a comprehensive set
Speaker 1: of facts with reference to where the material was from.
Speaker 2: Just a blame pro a, Thanks Gerry.
Speaker 1: Sorry, I didn't I think of that business. But that
Speaker 1: is so difficult to do and learn. Now, if I
Speaker 1: had read set of facts that came from AI, I could,
Speaker 1: because of my experience, look and go no, that's not right,
Speaker 1: we don't need that. But if people don't learn that
Speaker 1: skill to start with, what you've just said is a
Speaker 1: con And that's not just we're talking law enforcement here,
Speaker 1: we're talking detectives. Because it's a world well winner. But
Speaker 1: it's across the board, isn't it.
Speaker 2: Embarrasters, lawyers, you know, it's everyone across the board. But
Speaker 2: I feel the benefits far our way, the negatives and
Speaker 2: I think that's an important piece of moving through to
Speaker 2: that next stage of embracing it. But make sure we
Speaker 2: don't lose sight of how we then skill our people
Speaker 2: to fact check properly to make sure that it's accurate,
Speaker 2: because it will cross reference. So you get one hundred
Speaker 2: statements from your homicide brief or trying to statue homicide brief,
Speaker 2: give me those facts and circumstances for the court. It'll
Speaker 2: cross reference everything for you and your exhibits and timeline
Speaker 2: it for you and put in the language that the
Speaker 2: courts want, that the barristers want. Defense can better understand
Speaker 2: the case and your prosecutors can better understand it. So
Speaker 2: it should be in theory expediting all of those concerns
Speaker 2: and your case conferences are very clear as to what
Speaker 2: other points and issuing here and anyone can agree, rather
Speaker 2: than going through volumes and volumes of all wielding trolley's
Speaker 2: worth of evidence into the court. It definitely has its place,
Speaker 2: but we need to make sure that people still keep
Speaker 2: their skills in, as you said, understanding what the courts want,
Speaker 2: what the investigators need, and what the law is. Well.
Speaker 1: To give an example, I'm just thinking when you were
Speaker 1: saying that it wasn't unusual to get a twenty page
Speaker 1: statement in a homicide investigation.
Speaker 2: That sounds a lot.
Speaker 1: But if you're going nothing down in the finite detail,
Speaker 1: or you do a URISP interview and an electronic interview,
Speaker 1: that might take three or four hours. So there's a
Speaker 1: lot of information there, a lot of work. And when
Speaker 1: I was leading the investigations, or when I was working
Speaker 1: on the I was doing the summary of it. But
Speaker 1: when I was leading the investigations, I was getting people
Speaker 1: to summarize this fift It might be a fifty page transcrip,
Speaker 1: summarize this in very condensed version, highlighting the key points,
Speaker 1: all the areas that I might need, all the person
Speaker 1: running the investigation might need to pull from that statement
Speaker 1: or interview. That's done, is it?
Speaker 2: Yeah? And I can see a space where we even
Speaker 2: not now to looking further, where your AI is actually
Speaker 2: there with you in the interview room and you've got
Speaker 2: all your data sets there with you. As you're asking
Speaker 2: the questions of the accused, I can tell you, hey,
Speaker 2: you're missing this piece.
Speaker 1: And it could do it live. And I think the
Speaker 1: technology is even there to do that now, isn't it.
Speaker 2: Yeah? It's just again building it so that it's secure,
Speaker 2: its safe. The integrity piece is part of it. But
Speaker 2: you don't want to walk out of an interview room
Speaker 2: and go I really forgot to ask that question.
Speaker 1: Well, the skill of a great detective was to sit down.
Speaker 1: I always thought this was one of the most valuable
Speaker 1: skills that detective had, was the ability to extract information
Speaker 1: from a witness. And if you had AI sitting there
Speaker 1: and you're my witness, I'm getting the statement, and sometimes
Speaker 1: you've been up for twenty four hours, Yeah you're tired
Speaker 1: and getting the statement, and then you come back and
Speaker 1: you've I.
Speaker 2: Forgot that it's wrong.
Speaker 1: You could have AI going you haven't covered off on
Speaker 1: when he last spoke to the victim. There's something as
Speaker 1: simple as that.
Speaker 2: It's right, yeah, yeah, exactly right. It has a place
Speaker 2: for it, and you don't want to have to be
Speaker 2: going back to reinterview or take another statement. I want
Speaker 2: to retraumatize the victims by going back, because every time
Speaker 2: you turn up on someone's doorstep, I'm back again. What
Speaker 2: do they want now? The anxiety everything, So you're there
Speaker 2: once you're there thorough and the AI is looking at
Speaker 2: your entire case, And as you said, a very skilled
Speaker 2: investigator knew their whole case, knew everything in and out.
Speaker 2: But nowadays, how many are they working on it? Once
Speaker 2: there's a human element that can forget that, but that's
Speaker 2: where AI has its real appetite to assist an investigator.
Speaker 2: It's another tool, and I think if we look at
Speaker 2: it has another tool, it's going to be a great
Speaker 2: benefit to community.
Speaker 1: Do you think the law enforcement will embrace it?
Speaker 2: I hope so, I really hope so. I think it'll
Speaker 2: free up time. But essentially the purpose is to identify
Speaker 2: offenders quicker than what we have been in the past.
Speaker 2: You know, who is this person? Do we use facial
Speaker 2: recognition technology? Do we use data sets of phone records
Speaker 2: or statement taking to help us better understand evidence and
Speaker 2: the case?
Speaker 1: Well, to me, what you're describing and what AI brings
Speaker 1: to it, it'd be like if I hand picked the
Speaker 1: world's best criminal investigation team and they're at my disposal.
Speaker 2: That's the best way to look at it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, Like I'm thinking with all that, some of
Speaker 1: the investigations and even we were having to chat the
Speaker 1: other other day, and I think we're both carried the
Speaker 1: trauma from it those late nights when a murders happened,
Speaker 1: or are serious crimes happen and you need a listening
Speaker 1: device or something put in place, and you're sitting there
Speaker 1: at two o'clock in the morning typing up and after David,
Speaker 1: that's going to be read by a Supreme Court judge,
Speaker 1: and how exhausting that was, and get it in the
Speaker 1: terminology that's appropriate, and you could actually blow the application
Speaker 1: if the judge gets cranky because you haven't laid it
Speaker 1: out properly. That could be done in a tenth.
Speaker 2: Of the time easy, and then some literally seconds for
Speaker 2: it to process all of the evidence that's in the
Speaker 2: system already and put out an affidavit in the right format.
Speaker 2: Then you just got to fact check it. You can
Speaker 2: have someone awake enough to make sure that it's fact checked.
Speaker 1: You keep coming back to the fact check. That's going
Speaker 1: to be the failings, isn't it, Because I would imagine
Speaker 1: one time something slips through the system and everyone goes, well,
Speaker 1: this is why we can't use AI. There's going to
Speaker 1: be a reluctance and police will hide behind that or
Speaker 1: law enforcement will hide well, you can't trust that because
Speaker 1: someone submitted the facts and had the wrong name or
Speaker 1: something as stupid as that. That's what we're going to
Speaker 1: make sure. So you need someone actually still putting a
Speaker 1: signature to it. You can't just go, oh, well that
Speaker 1: was a computer. It's not our fault.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And that's what we've got to work with law
Speaker 2: enforcement agencies. Develop the policies and procedures that sit with
Speaker 2: the AI. Don't compete against it. Let's work with it
Speaker 2: and have your policies and procedures that talk to it.
Speaker 2: This is what I expect from you. So your supervisor
Speaker 2: as a fact checking, we're doing that now.
Speaker 1: They so we had to, like I'd have a junior
Speaker 1: officer prepare an affidavid and I would have to sign
Speaker 1: it off before it was forwarded. And that was me
Speaker 1: fact checking that the person knew what they were doing
Speaker 1: and it was truthful and accurate.
Speaker 2: That's right. You just haven't got the poor young constable
Speaker 2: doing four or five hours on an affidavit.
Speaker 1: We'll take a break here. When we come back, we'll
Speaker 1: break it down and talk about some investigations on how
Speaker 1: that could actually help. I'd like to look at the
Speaker 1: unsolved homicide, the cold cases too. On my mind, sort
Speaker 1: of the ticking ovor how I could play a part
Speaker 1: in that. But it is a brave new world.
Speaker 2: Isn't it. It certainly is Gary, And I think.
Speaker 1: I might be able to do myself out of a job,
Speaker 1: would I like, as in hosting a podcast like nothing's
Speaker 1: off the table, is it? No?
Speaker 2: That's right. That's where everyone's a bit anxious and a
Speaker 2: bit nervous about what does that future look like? Replacing
Speaker 2: placing jobs.
Speaker 1: But well, I want to talk talk about court too,
Speaker 1: because I think that it's going to be a big
Speaker 1: change in court, not just the role of solicitors and
Speaker 1: whether it be defense or prosecution, but magistrates and judges
Speaker 1: and yeah, interesting, Okay, we'll be back back shortly.