EVIDENCE VEL NON - THE NON SENSE OF VOICEPRINT IDENTIFICATION

• NCJ Number: 17739
• Journal: Kentucky Law Journal Volume: 62 Issue: 2 Dated: (1973-74) Pages: 301-326
• Author(s): W R JONES
• Date Published: 1973
• Length: 26 pages
• Corporate Author: University of Kentucky
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Best Practice/State-of-the-Art Review
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

THIS ARTICLE PROVIDES A DESCRIPTION OF VOICEPRINT METHODS, REVIEWS SEVERAL MAJOR STUDIES ON THE USE OF VOICEPRINTS, AND DISCUSSES ISSUES IN THE ADMISSABILITY OF VOICE IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE.

Abstract

THE TERM VOICEPRINT REFERS TO THE GRAPHIC OUTPUT OF A HIGH SPEED SOUND SPECTROGRAPH, WHICH DISPLAYS SOME OF THE FACTORS ALLEGED TO UNIQUELY CHARACTERIZE A PARTICULAR SPEAKER: FREQUENCY AND INTENSITY OF THE VOICE AS A FUNCTION OF TIME. UNTIL 1971, IDENTIFICATION BY THE VOICEPRINT METHOD WAS ALMOST UNIVERSALLY REJECTED BY THE APPELLATE COURTS. REASONS FOR THIS RELUCTANCE TO ACCEPT VOICEPRINT IDENTIFICATION AS EVIDENCE ARE OUTLINED. AN ANALYSIS OF CASE LAW DEVELOPING IN THE AREA OF ADMISSABILITY OF VOICEPRINT IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE IS ALSO PROVIDED. VARIOUS RESEARCH EFFORTS WHICH HAVE DEALT WITH THE RELIABILITY OF VOICEPRINT IDENTIFICATION ARE EXAMINED, AND ISSUES IN SCIENTIFIC ACCEPTANCE OF VOICEPRINT TECHNIQUES ARE DISCUSSED. THE AUTHOR CONCLUDES THAT THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL IS TOO IMPORTANT FOR COURTS TO PREMATURELY ACCEPT VOICEPRINTS AS EVIDENCE ON THE BASIS OF EMBRYONIC RESEARCH AND LIMITED ACCEPTANCE OF THE TECHNIQUE BY THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY.