Hearing voices: forensic speaker identification technology and expert listening in the American courtroom

Abstract

ABSTRACT Police wiretaps and taped emergency dispatch calls are just a couple of examples of the kinds of voice recordings that have made their way into criminal and civil proceedings. In some instances, an expert witness may be called upon to identify the person whose voice was captured on tape or digitally recorded. However, this type of forensic analysis – commonly referred to as “speaker identification” – has not been universally accepted by the courts. In this article, I look at several US cases where the efficacy of forensic speaker identification has been brought into question. Using concepts from Science and Technology Studies (STS) and Sociolegal Studies, I examine the attempts made by experts to have their methods of voice identification accepted at trial as valid and reliable techniques, and the decisions made by judges to either admit or exclude this evidence. I demonstrate that the various rulings regarding the admissibility of speaker identification evidence reflect the interplay between law and science and is the direct result of the “boundary-work” undertaken by experts and how judges assess these activities. I argue that forensic speaker identification evidence must be understood and conceptualised as “law-science hybrids” that are co-produced over the course of a trial.