About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

33 Sydney L. Rev. 395 (2011)
Mere Guesswork: Cross-Lingual Voice Comparisons and the Jury

handle is hein.journals/sydney33 and id is 401 raw text is: Mere guesswork': Cross- Lingual Voice Comparisons and the Jury Gary Edmond,* Kristy Martiret and Mehera San Roque' Abstract Over the last two decades there has been significant growth in the number of cases involving voice comparison and identification evidence based on audio surveillance technologies. Courts have generally been open to this evidence, as well as allowing juries to undertake their own comparisons. Overall, decisions on the admissibility of this evidence feature a strong resistance to attempts to require some assessment of the reliability of voice comparisons and an over-reliance on traditional features of the adversarial trial, including directions and warnings, to expose and address weaknesses in this evidence. This article focuses on two cases where the jury was invited to compare voices speaking across two different languages. Drawing on empirical research concerned with the validity and reliability of lay voice comparison, this article outlines the dangers associated with juries engaging in cross-lingual voice identification and comparison. It argues that if courts are to take seriously their obligation to ensure a fair trial, they should be willing to exclude voice comparison evidence of unknown probative value and reliability, rather than rely on a 'properly instructed jury' as the best mechanism for managing the frailties of this evidence. Professor, School of Law and Director, Expertise, Evidence & Law Program, University of New South Wales. This research was supported by the Australian Research Council (DP0771770 and FT0992041). An earlier version of this essay was presented at the Evidence Law in the 2 1' Century Conference, University of Sydney, September 2010. The authors would like to thank the participants at that Conference, as well as David Hamer, Martina Pasqualino and the anonymous referees, for their comments on earlier versions of this paper. Lecturer, School of Psychology, University of New South Wales. Senior Lecturer, School of Law, University of New South Wales.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most