Voice comparison evidence given by a non-expert interpreter who has gained familiarity with a speaker's voice through repeated listening to intercepted telephone calls in a foreign language is admissible as an aid to the jury under the Butera principle, as applied in R v Solomon. The principle applies equally whether the calls are in English or a foreign language. Adequate jury directions must raise specific factors relevant to reliability, give emphatic warnings about the dangers of voice comparison, and make clear the evidence is an aid only and not a substitute for the jury's own assessment.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.