africa34 asked this question on 3/27/2000:

I'm writing a paper on controversial things in the area of phonetics. I was wondering how you all feel about the use of acoustic phonetics in criminal forensics -- the use of "voice prints" as evidence in a trial. Do you think this is a reliable source? Are there certain times when you feel it should not be used? Any other information would be greatly appreciated....I'm running out of time! Thank you so much.

bjo328 gave this response on 4/4/2000:

no evidence is proof positive in that it can be presented without challenge from a good defense team, however, any evidence that challenges the credibility of the perpetrator also challenges the resolve to continue denying involvement. The guilt of the perpetrator weighs on him/her when any kind of evidence is presented, even if it is flawed. But specifically, voice prints have been used as stress indicators to learn if someone is lying (very fascinating information on this type of analyse)and voice prints can be used to narrow down suspects for one type of comparison or elimination

The average rating for this answer is 5.

africa34 rated this answer a 5.