Opinion Evidence; Admissibility of ad Hoc Expert Voice Recognition Evidence: R v Flynn
| Author | Damian Warburton,Thomas Lewis |
| Published date | 01 January 2009 |
| Date | 01 January 2009 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1350/ijep.2009.13.1.311 |
| Subject Matter | Case Note |
CASE NOTE
ADMISSIBILITY OF AD HOC EXPERT VOICE RECOGNITION EVIDENCE
CASE NOTE
Opinion evidence; admissibility of ad
hoc expert voice recognition evidence:
RvFlynn
By Damian Warburton*and
Senior Lecturer, Bristol Law School
Thomas Lewis†
Undergraduate student, Bristol Law School
Keywords Opinion evidence; Expert ad hoc; Lay listener evidence; Voice
recognition; Speaker identification
he appellants, F and S, were convicted of conspiracy to commit robbery.
A third co-accused was acquitted and a fourth pleaded guilty.
On 29 April 2006 a robbery of commercial premises was attempted, but the
robbers were disturbed and fled empty handed. A van that was used by the
offenders had been under covert surveillance by the police and a secret listening
and transmitting device had been fitted. Recordings of the offenders’ conversa-
tions in the hour preceding the attempted robbery formed part of the case against
the appellants.
Although the police had seen the van leave the location of the offence, in
company with another car containing hooded men, they had been unable to stop
or follow either vehicle. The van was subsequently recovered and found to
contain the fingerprints of both appellants. These fingerprints, in addition to
doi:1350/ijep.2009.13.1.311
50 (2009) 13 E&P 50–57 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE & PROOF
T
* Email: damian.warburton@uwe.ac.uk.
† Email: thomas4.lewis@live.uwe.ac.uk.
To continue reading
Request your trial