Voice Identification is a common issue faced by Fort Lauderdale criminal lawyers
Like visual identifications, a voice identification made in an unreliably suggestive atmosphere may constitute a violation of Due Process. Aside from constitutional issues, evidence law governs the admissibility of verbal statements made by the defendant. Any Fort Lauderdale criminal lawyer knows that any witness familiar with the defendant's voice may testify that he recognized the defendant's voice on a particular occasion. Conversations overheard on a telephone are admissible as substantive evidence when the identities of the parties to the conversation are established. However, a mere statement of identity by the party calling is not in itself sufficient proof of such identity. For example, when Lynda Tripp testified before the grand jury as to telephone conversations with Monica Lewinsky, Ms. Tripp had to establish that she was familiar with and recognized the caller's voice as that of Ms. Lewinsky. The identity of the caller would not be established by the caller stating: "Hi, this is Monica." If "caller ID" or some other form of computerized call-tracking system is used, the reliability of the device must be established otherwise it is incumbent upon the Fort Lauderdale criminal lawyer to prohibit the identification evidence by way of either motion or objection.
A voice exemplar offered merely to establish the physical characteristics or a person's speech patterns is not testimonial in nature. A defendant may demonstrate his speech patterns to the jury without being sworn in as a witness and Fort Lauderdale criminal lawyers must be ware that doing so does not render a defendant subject to cross-examination.