Under the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), the only precondition for admission of voice identification evidence is relevance under s 55(1); common law requirements of distinctive features or prior familiarity did not survive the Act's enactment. Differences in recording quality between an accused's voice sample and comparator samples are matters of weight for the jury, not admissibility. For expert handwriting comparison evidence, circumstantial evidence that specimen documents were written by the accused is sufficient for admissibility; it is not necessary that every comparator document be independently verified as the accused's handwriting.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 26 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 26 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.