Owaisi voice sample will bare the truth of hate
Experts of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory recorded the legislator's voice as he has reportedly claimed during the interrogation that the voice in the video footage of his hate speech is not his.
Official said the voice sample would be sent to a laboratory in Chandigarh to match it with the voice in the video footage of the public meeting.
Akbar Owaisi was brought from the district jail in Adilabad to Nirmal, where he was produced before Judicial First Class Magistrate K. Ajesh Kumar. After the recording of voice, the magistrate extended the legislator's judicial custody till Feb 19. The police later shifted him back to jail in Adilabad, about 300 km from here and 90 km from Nirmal.
Akbar Owaisi was arrested Jan 8 for making a hate speech at a public meeting in Nirmal Dec 22. He is since lodged in Adilabad jail. A member of assembly from Chandrayangutta constituency in Hyderabad, he is facing charges of sedition, waging war against the nation and promoting enmity between people.
The MIM leader was also produced before a court in Nizamabad Jan 24 in another case of hate speech booked in that town. A court in Nizamabad is set to pronounce later in the day orders on his bail petition and also on police's request for permission to record his voice.
Why Chandigarh lab
The
voice
testing
department
is
called
the
tape
authentication
and
speaker
identification
(TASI)
division.
The
Central
Forensic
and
Scientific
Laboratory,
Chandigarh,
is
one
of
the
sophisticated
labs
in
the
country
to
analyse
voice
samples.
Even
though
Mumbai
too
has
voice
lab
there
is
an
acute
shortage
of
staff.
the
Chandigarh
unit
is
also
the
country's
first
laboratory
to
put
in
place
a
mechanism
to
solve
crimes
pertaining
to
voice
chats
on
social
networking
sites,
Skype,
Vieber
and
other
such
voice
communications.
The
number
of
crimes
taking
place
through
internet-telephony
or
Voice
Over
Internet
Protocol,
voice
chats
are
on
the
rise,
but
so
far,
no
mechanism
was
available
in
India
to
solve
these
cases.
Voice identification process
In most cases an audio exemplar (audio recording) is created by the audio forensic expert to be used as a comparison to the evidence for the purpose of identification. Unlike the original evidence, the exemplar is created in a controlled environment.
A transcript of the evidence recording is also created to help guide the exemplar recording process. The forensic expert does not notify the accused (defendant) of the portions of the transcript that will be recorded until the scheduled recording time. The reason for this is to have the ability to be spontaneous and unrehearsed when creating the exemplar.
The exemplar comparison call is scheduled between the lawyer, audio forensic expert and the defendant. If the defendant is incarcerated the prison is involved in the coordination so the call can be recorded from the prison.
Its best to have the defendant read each sample three times giving the expert options when conducting the testing. Once a reliable exemplar has been created, the audio expert can begin the voice identification process.
Creating a high quality exemplar under supervision is probably the most important part of the voice identification process. If there are other recorded conversations that include the defendant's voice but are not the exact words used in the evidence recording, they can be used as comparison.
How evidence is evaluated
In case of positive identification: At least 90 percent of all comparable words must be very similar aurally and spectrally, producing not less than twenty matching words. The voice samples must not be more than six years apart.
In case of probable identification: At least 80 percent of the comparable words must be very similar aurally and spectrally, producing not less than fifteen matching words.
In case of possible identification: At least 80 percent of comparable words must be very similar aurally and spectrally, producing not less than ten matching words.
If case of inconclusive outcome: Falls below either the Possible Identification or Possible Elimination confidence levels and/or the examiner does not believe a meaningful decision is obtainable due to various limiting factors.
OneIndia News