A fair ‘hearing’

Abstract

Voice identification evidence, identifying an offender by the sound of their voice, is sometimes the only means of identifying someone who has committed a crime. Auditory memory is, however, associated with poorer performance than visual memory, and is subject to distinctive sources of unreliability. Consequently, it is important for investigating authorities to adopt appropriate strategies when dealing with voice identification, particularly when the identification involves a voice previously unknown to the witness. Appropriate voice identification parades conducted by police can offer an otherwise unavailable means of identifying the offender. This article suggests some ‘best practice’ techniques for voice identification parades and then, using reported Australian criminal cases as case studies, evaluates voice identification parade procedures used by police. Overall, we argue that the case studies reveal practices that are inconsistent with current scientific understandings about auditory memory and voice identifications, and that courts are insufficiently attending to the problems associated with this evidence.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 16 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.