Should Justice Beware? Are the Current Forms of Voice Identification Reliable Enough to be Admitted in the UK’s Criminal Courts as Prosecution Evidence?

Singh, C. 2015. Should Justice Beware? Are the Current Forms of Voice Identification Reliable Enough to be Admitted in the UK’s Criminal Courts as Prosecution Evidence? 5th International Conference on Evidence Law and Forensic Science. University of Adelaide, Australia Jul 2015

TitleShould Justice Beware? Are the Current Forms of Voice Identification Reliable Enough to be Admitted in the UK’s Criminal Courts as Prosecution Evidence?
AuthorsSingh, C.
TypeConference paper
Abstract

The paper related to my article of covert surveillance. The debate relating to the quality of voice identification evidence in the United Kingdom continues against the backdrop of advances being made in the use of biometric voice identification evidence (BIVE) and the technology (BVIT). Anecdotal evidence shows that BVIE is being adduced in criminal prosecutions across the United Kingdom (UK) predominantly in cases involving terror crimes. This also suggests that the courts are willing to accept BVIE as being reliable even though experts in the fields of phonetics and law disagree as to its veracity. The argument against admission rests on the lack of sophistication in the traditional ear-witness voice identification methods of acoustic and auditory analysis (AAA), and now biometrics because of its infancy. Experts therefore argue that scientific reliability that should be demanded from such evidence if it is to be used for criminal prosecutions and this not currently achieved. Therefore a number of issues arise as a result of this. For example the potential erosion of civil rights, the legal implications that relate to obtaining and using mixed biometric voice identification evidence (MBVIE) – this is the evidence of an ear-witness verified using BVIT. Related to this is the notion that the jury and lawyers need to be educated on how such evidence should be received and used. Presently, there insufficient guidance on where the UKs courts should draw the line in admitting potentially hazardous evidence such as this. Exactly when BVIE becomes unreliable in a legal and scientific sense remains unclear. This significantly contributes to the debate surrounding the codification of evidence law and the introduction of a reliability test, along the lines of that used in other jurisdictions including the United States of America, to mitigate the risks that lie in admitting unreliable evidence. The purpose of this paper is to contrast ear-witness and BVIE by exploring the contemporary debates that surround their admission and the notional extent to which BVIT is being used to police the UK. Furthermore, to review whether the advances made in BVIT can contribute to the reliability of the evidence by reducing error rates and false-positive identification.

KeywordsEvidence Law, Surveillance, Biometric Voice Identification Evidence
Year2015
Conference5th International Conference on Evidence Law and Forensic Science

Related outputs

Bumped Redundancy and the Range of Reasonable Responses: To what Extent, if any, should Employers Consider Bumping? Life after Mirab v Mentor Graphics Limited UKEAT/0172/17DA
Singh, C. 2019. Bumped Redundancy and the Range of Reasonable Responses: To what Extent, if any, should Employers Consider Bumping? Life after Mirab v Mentor Graphics Limited UKEAT/0172/17DA. Issues in Legal Scholarship . 17 (1), p. 20190007. doi:10.1515/ils-2019-0007

Eliciting Best Evidence from a Child Witness: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom and India
Singh, C. 2019. Eliciting Best Evidence from a Child Witness: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom and India. Issues in Legal Scholarship . 17 (1), p. 20190003. doi:10.1515/ils-2019-0003

Criminal Evidence: Evidencing Defences to Murder. R v Goodwin (Anthony Gerard) [2018] EWCA Crim 2287
Singh, C. 2018. Criminal Evidence: Evidencing Defences to Murder. R v Goodwin (Anthony Gerard) [2018] EWCA Crim 2287. International Commentary on Evidence . 15 (1), p. 20180005. doi:10.1515/ice-2018-0005

Evidence and Variation of Confiscation Orders: R v O'Flaherty (Carl Anthony) (Court of Appeal Criminal Division, 29th of October 2018)
Singh, C. 2018. Evidence and Variation of Confiscation Orders: R v O'Flaherty (Carl Anthony) (Court of Appeal Criminal Division, 29th of October 2018). International Commentary on Evidence . 15 (1), p. 20180004. doi:10.1515/ice-2018-0004

Disability Discrimination: Obesity and the Court of Justice of the European Union’s decision in Karsten Kaltoft v Billund Kommune Case C-354/13 ECJ
Singh, C. 2018. Disability Discrimination: Obesity and the Court of Justice of the European Union’s decision in Karsten Kaltoft v Billund Kommune Case C-354/13 ECJ. Issues in Legal Scholarship . doi:10.1515/ils-2016-0250

The Panoply of Challenges Facing Modern Identification Evidence and the Evidentiary Reliability of Coincidental Forensics
Singh, C. 2017. The Panoply of Challenges Facing Modern Identification Evidence and the Evidentiary Reliability of Coincidental Forensics.

Unlocking Evidence. 3rd edition
Singh, C. and Ramjohn, M. 2016. Unlocking Evidence. 3rd edition. Routledge.

Evidential Challenges Posed by the Panoply of Biometrics: Is Biometric Voice Identification made any more reliable by Cell Site Analysis?
Singh, C. 2016. Evidential Challenges Posed by the Panoply of Biometrics: Is Biometric Voice Identification made any more reliable by Cell Site Analysis? Transnational Law Conference and Research Workshop / Showcase . Charles Darwin University, Australia Mar 2016

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Should Justice Beware: A Review of Voice Identification Evidence in Light of Advances in Biometric Voice Identification Technology
Singh, C. 2015. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Should Justice Beware: A Review of Voice Identification Evidence in Light of Advances in Biometric Voice Identification Technology. International Commentary on Evidence . 11 (1), p. 1–28. doi:10.1515/ice-2014-0009

Evidence Q&A
Singh, C. 2015. Evidence Q&A. Abingdon, Oxon Routledge.

Beginning Evidence
Singh, C. 2014. Beginning Evidence. Abingdon, Oxon Routledge.

Law Express Questions and Answers: Employment Law
Singh, C. 2013. Law Express Questions and Answers: Employment Law. Pearson.

Biography and the Educative
Singh, C. 2012. Biography and the Educative. PhD thesis University of Southampton Faculty of Social and Human Sciences

Permalink - https://westminsterresearch.westminster.ac.uk/item/qv6x3/should-justice-beware-are-the-current-forms-of-voice-identification-reliable-enough-to-be-admitted-in-the-uk-s-criminal-courts-as-prosecution-evidence


Share this
Tweet
Email