CONCLUSION
The technique of voice identification by means of aural and
spectrographic comparison is still an unsettled topic in law. Although the spectrographic
voice identification method has progressed greatly since it was first introduced to a
court of law back in the mid 1960's, it still faces stiff resistance on the issue of
admissibility in the courts today. One of the reasons for such opposition regarding
admissibility is that the method has evolved greatly since its initial application. Court
decisions based on early methods of voice identification analysis are not applicable to
the methods used today. No longer are voices compared on the basis of a limited group of
key words. Today's aural/spectrographic voice identification method takes advantage of the
latest in technological advancements and interweaves several analyses into one procedure
to produce an accurate opinion as to the identity of a voice. This modern technique
combines the experience of a trained examiner performing the visual analysis of the
spectrograms and aural analysis of the recordings with the use of the latest instruments
modern technology has to offer, all in a standardized methodology to assure reliability.
Court decisions reviewing the early voice identification cases may not be relevant to
present day cases because the older decisions were based on less sophisticated procedures.
Most of the courts which have rejected admission have been aware of continuing work in
this field and have specifically left the door open as to future admissibility.
Proper presentation and explanation of the research
pertaining to spectrographic voice identification analysis will allow the courts to better
understand the accuracy and reliability of the spectrographic voice identification method.
When the research is properly presented, the studies show that properly trained
individuals, using standard methodology, produce accurate results.
The current trends in the admissibility issue of voice
identification evidence indicate that courts are more willing to allow the evidence into
the courtroom when a proper foundation has been established which then allows the trier of
fact to determine the weight to be assigned to the evidence.