I doubt it, especially if the audio quality was enhanced in order to add clarity to the words and possibly separate that from background noise. For every expert witness the defence always seems to come up with another to add the possibility the voice was distorted during recording. I don’t think the strength of a prosecution will weigh heavily on four words nor the image in the video, they’ve got something more. JMO
This snippet refers to using evidence from a recorded telephone call, I would assume very similar to a recorded voice.
Although voice recognition is often presented as evidence in legal cases, its scientific basis can be shaky
www.scientificamerican.com
“……One of the main hurdles voice analysts have to face is the poor quality of recorded fragments. “The telephone signal does not carry enough information to allow for fine-grained distinctions of speech sounds. You would need a band twice as broad to tell certain consonants apart, such as
f and
s or m and
n,” said Andrea Paoloni, a scientist at the Ugo Bordoni Foundation and the foremost forensic phoneticist in Italy until his death in November 2015. To make things worse, recorded messages are often noisy, short and can be years or even decades old. In some cases, simulating the context of a phone call can be particularly challenging. Imagine recreating a call placed in a crowded movie theater, using an old cell phone or one made by an obscure foreign brand….”
