DOCSLIB.ORG

A Proposed Framework for Forensic Audio Enhancement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Proposed Framework for Forensic Audio Enhancement A PROPOSED FRAMEWORK FOR FORENSIC AUDIO ENHANCEMENT by JAMES ZJALIC BSc, Birmingham City University, 2015 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Recording Arts Program 2017 © 2017 JAMES ZJALIC ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii This thesis for the Master of Science degree by James Zjalic has been approved for the Recording Arts Program by Catalin Grigoras, Chair Jeffrey Smith Lorne Bregitzer December 1, 2017 iii Zjalic, James (MS, Recording Arts Program) A Proposed Framework For Forensic Audio Enhancement Thesis directed by Associate Professor Catalin Grigoras ABSTRACT Although there are many processes available to the forensic audio analyst seeking to enhance a recording, the order in which they are executed is vital in achieving the optimal enhancement, as each tool is used in isolation and modifies the signal in a unique way based on algorithms applied. The output of a processor in a sequence is determined by the output of the previous, and the order of this chain has a cumulative effect that provides differing quality enhancement results. There are currently various papers available detailing the individual methods of audio enhancement processes, but no document yet exists which provides a context for the interaction of these processes and how the sequence of methods can be ordered in a myriad of ways to produce differing results. Using both scientific reasoning and experimental procedures, this research will propose a framework to produce optimal results when performing audio enhancement for forensic purposes. The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication. Approved: Dr. Catalin Grigoras iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank everybody at the National Centre of Media Forensics for their support, knowledge, and patience during my studies. Specifically, thank you to my professors Dr. Catalin Grigoras and Jeff Smith for the guidance, support, and knowledge. More explicitly, Catalin’s late night seminars provided me with an informal platform to discuss ideas freely, however rudimentary or implausible they may have been. Jeff’s enthusiasm for the subject matter is infectious and he was always highly responsive and helpful with any questions I had, however mundane. Thank you to Leah & Emma for keeping me on track with the clerical side of my studies, allowing me to focus on getting as much out of my Masters as possible. I would also like to thank my cohorts for the laughs, conversations, and support during my time at the NCMF. v TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1 Scope ............................................................................................................................................ 4 Audio Enhancement Characteristics ............................................................................................. 6 Enhancement or manipulation? .................................................................................................... 7 Legalities and Best Practices ........................................................................................................ 8 II. SOUND FUNDAMENTALS .................................................................................................... 10 Auditory Systems ....................................................................................................................... 10 DSP Basics ................................................................................................................................. 14 Recording Limitations ................................................................................................................ 18 III. SETTING THE STAGE ........................................................................................................... 21 Evidence Preparation .................................................................................................................. 21 Listening Environment Optimization ......................................................................................... 22 Initial Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 23 System Calibration ..................................................................................................................... 23 IV. HYPOTHESIS ......................................................................................................................... 25 V. PRE-PROCESSING .................................................................................................................. 27 Critical Listening ........................................................................................................................ 27 Noise ....................................................................................................................................... 27 Distortion ................................................................................................................................ 27 Fast Fourier Transform ............................................................................................................... 28 VI. REVIEW OF AUDIO ENHANCEMENTS ............................................................................. 31 vi De-Click ..................................................................................................................................... 31 De-Clip ....................................................................................................................................... 32 Spectral Repair ........................................................................................................................... 35 Stereo Source Separation ............................................................................................................ 35 Reference cancellation................................................................................................................ 36 Equalization ................................................................................................................................ 38 Static Filters ............................................................................................................................ 39 Shelving Filters ....................................................................................................................... 41 Dynamic Equalization ............................................................................................................ 42 Adaptive Filters ...................................................................................................................... 42 De-Hum ...................................................................................................................................... 43 Broadband Noise Reduction ....................................................................................................... 44 Time Domain .......................................................................................................................... 45 Spectral Domain ..................................................................................................................... 45 Gain ............................................................................................................................................ 46 Compression ........................................................................................................................... 46 Limiters .................................................................................................................................. 49 De-reverberation ......................................................................................................................... 49 Normalization ............................................................................................................................. 51 Time-stretching .......................................................................................................................... 53 VII. PROPOSED FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................. 54 Framework Rationale ..................................................................................................................... 56 Evidence Preparation .................................................................................................................. 56 vii Analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 58 Processing ................................................................................................................................... 60 Output ......................................................................................................................................... 64 VIII. CASE STUDIES ................................................................................................................... 66 Case One – Clicks, noise and reverb .......................................................................................... 70 Case Two – Clipping, hum, background speech ........................................................................ 77 Case Three
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Statistical Pattern Recognition for Audio Forensics -- Empirical
    Statistical Pattern Recognition for Audio Forensics { Empirical Investigations on the Application Scenarios Audio Steganalysis and Microphone Forensics Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doktoringenieur (Dr.-Ing.) angenommen durch die Fakult¨atf¨urInformatik der Otto-von-Guericke-Universit¨atMagdeburg von: Dipl.-Inform. Christian Kr¨atzer geboren am 12. Dezember 1978 in Halberstadt Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Jana Dittmann, Otto-von-Guericke Universit¨atMagdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany Prof. Dr. Stefan Katzenbeisser, Technische Universit¨atDarmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany Prof. Dr. Scott A. Craver, Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY, United States of America Magdeburg, Germany 23. Mai 2013 Abstract Media forensics is a quickly growing research field struggling to gain the same acceptance as traditional forensic investigation methods. Media forensics tasks such as proving image manipulations on digital images or audio manipulations on digital sound files are as relevant today as they were for their analogue counterparts some decades ago. The difference is that tools like Photoshop now allow a large number of people to manipulate digital media objects with a processing speed far beyond anything imaginable in times when image, audio or video manipulation of analogue media was a hardware- and labour-intensive task requiring skill and experience. Currently, there exists a large number of research prototypes but only a small number of accepted tools that are capable of answering specific questions regularly arising in court cases, such as the origin (source authenticity) of an image or recording, or the integrity of a media file. The reason for this discrepancy between the number of research prototypes and the number of solutions accepted in court has to be sought in the very nature of most judicial systems: Judges have to distinguish between valid bases for evidence and expert testimonies on the one hand, and `junk science' on the other hand.
    [Show full text]
  • Crime-Scene-Technician-Curriculum-Guide
    © A Curriculum Guide for Contextualized Instruction in Workforce Readiness Crime Scene Technician The Literacy Institute at Virginia Commonwealth University Virginia Adult Learning Resource Center 3600 W Broad St. Ste 112 Richmond, VA 23230 www.valrc.org Southwest Virginia Community College 724 Community College Road Cedar Bluff, VA 24609 1 www.pluggedinva.com This work by Virginia Commonwealth University is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. PluggedInVA© is a project of the Virginia Adult Learning Resource Center at Virginia Commonwealth University. PluggedInVA© has received funds from the Governor's Productivity Investment Fund, The Chancellor's Elearning Enhancement & Development Grant, the Virginia Department of Education Office of Adult Education & Literacy, the Virginia Community College System, the Virginia Employment Commission, and the Department of Labor. This curriculum guide was developed as part of a Department of Labor Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training grant to Southwest Virginia Community College. 2 October, 2013 Table of Contents I. PluggedInVA Introduction and Project Rationale II. PluggedInVA Curriculum Framework III. Instructional Schedules Monthly Objectives Weekly Instructional Template IV. Capstone Project Project Description Project Planning Template V. Instructional Approaches and Strategies VI. Materials and Resources Appendices i. Sample Instructional Activities ii. College Survival Resources iii. Online Collaboration Tool Example v. Phlebotomy Classroom Activities and Resources A. Career Assessment B. Ethics and Justice C. Mythbusting in Forensic Science D. What is Leadership? And What is Its Value? Information about the PluggedInVA project, including resources for planning and implementation, are available on the PluggedInVA website. 3 I. Introduction PluggedInVA is a career pathways program that prepares adult learners with the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in postsecondary education, training, and high-demand, high-wage careers in the 21st century.
    [Show full text]
  • Government Response to the Consultation on New Statutory Powers for the Forensic Science Regulator
    Government response to the consultation on new statutory powers for the Forensic Science Regulator JULY 2015 Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Summary of responses 2 2.1 Question 15a – Respondents 2 2.2 Question 15b – Forensic Service Providers 3 2.3 Question 1 – Stages of regulation 4 2.4 Question 2 – Forensic Science Disciplines 6 2.5 Question 3 – Role of the Regulator: Further Comments 8 2.6 Question 4 – Statutory Code of Practice 9 2.7 Question 5 – Compliance with the Code 11 2.8 Question 6 – Making the Code of Practice Statutory 13 2.9 Question 7 – Making the Code of Practice Statutory: Further Comments 14 2.10 Question 8 – Powers of the Forensic Science Regulator 15 2.11 Question 9 – Sanctions for Non-Compliance with the Code 16 2.12 Question 10 – Access to UKAS Records 18 2.13 Question 11 – Statutory Powers of Investigation 19 2.14 Question 12 – Making the Code of Practice Statutory: Further Comments 20 2.15 Question 13 – Regulation of Standards: Further Comments 21 2.16 Question 14 – Cost/Benefit Analysis 22 3. List of respondents 23 1. Introduction 1.1 The post of Forensic Science Regulator was established in 2008 and was held by Andrew Rennison until August 2014. The current Regulator is Dr Gillian Tully. 1.2 Although sponsored by the Home Office, the Regulator is a public appointee and operates independently of the Home Office, on behalf of the criminal justice system as a whole. The Regulator has jurisdiction throughout England and Wales. The Scottish and Northern Irish authorities follow the Regulator’s standards on a voluntary basis.
    [Show full text]
  • Forensic Audio Analysis 612-637 Forensic Video Analysis 638-651 Imaging 652-687 Digital Evidence 688-743
    17th Interpol International Forensic Science Managers Symposium, Lyon 8th -10th October 2013 Review Papers Edited by Prof. Niamh Nic Daéid Centre for Forensic Science, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE 3 Mr Nelson Santos, Chairman of the Organising Committee CRIMINALISTICS 5 Technical co-ordinator :- Prof. Kimmo Himberg Examination of Firearms 6-43 Examination of Firearms – Gun Shot Residue 44-66 Forensic Examination of Marks 67-128 Examination of Paint 129-174 Forensic Examination of Fibres and Textiles 175-205 Forensic Geology 206-229 FORENSIC CHEMISTRY 230 Technical co-ordinator :- Prof Niamh NicDaeid Fire Cause Investigation and Fire Debris Analysis 231-279 Analysis and Detection of Explosives 280-435 Drug Evidence 436-524 Toxicology 526-610 MEDIA EVIDENCE 611 Technical co-ordinator :- Dr. Peter Pfefferli, Forensic Audio Analysis 612-637 Forensic Video Analysis 638-651 Imaging 652-687 Digital Evidence 688-743 INDENTIFICATION SCIENCES 744 Technical co-ordinator :- Dr. Kevin Sullivan Fingermarks and other Impressions 745-820 Body Fluid Identification and DNA Typing 821-853 Questioned Documents 854-897 Forensic Science Management 898-923 Forensic Audio Analysis Review: 2010–2013 Catalin Grigoras, Ph.D.1 Jeff M. Smith, M.Sc.1 Geoffrey Stewart Morrison, Ph.D.2 Ewald Enzinger, M.Phil. 2 1 National Center for Media Forensics, University of Colorado Denver 2 Forensic Voice Comparison Laboratory, School of Electrical Engineering and Telecommunications, University of New South Wales TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction
    [Show full text]
  • Forensic Science 1 Forensic Science
    Forensic science 1 Forensic science "Forensics" redirects here. For other uses, see Forensics (disambiguation). Forensic science Physiological sciences • Forensic anthropology • Forensic archaeology • Forensic odontology • Forensic entomology • Forensic pathology • Forensic botany • Forensic biology • DNA profiling • Bloodstain pattern analysis • Forensic chemistry • Forensic osteology Social sciences • Forensic psychology • Forensic psychiatry Forensic criminalistics • Ballistics • Ballistic fingerprinting • Body identification • Fingerprint analysis • Forensic accounting • Forensic arts • Forensic footwear evidence • Forensic toxicology • Gloveprint analysis • Palmprint analysis • Questioned document examination • Vein matching Digital forensics • Computer forensics • Forensic data analysis • Database forensics • Mobile device forensics • Network forensics • Forensic video • Forensic audio Related disciplines • Fire investigation Forensic science 2 • Fire accelerant detection • Forensic engineering • Forensic linguistics • Forensic materials engineering • Forensic polymer engineering • Forensic statistics • Forensic taphonomy • Vehicular accident reconstruction People • William M. Bass • George W. Gill • Richard Jantz • Edmond Locard • Douglas W. Owsley • Werner Spitz • Auguste Ambroise Tardieu • Juan Vucetich Related articles • Crime scene • CSI effect • Perry Mason syndrome • Pollen calendar • Skid mark • Trace evidence • Use of DNA in forensic entomology • v • t [1] • e Forensic science is the scientific method of gathering and examining
    [Show full text]
  • A Short Note on Forensic Science
    A SHORT NOTE ON FORENSIC SCIENCE - Yash Vardhan Singh Definition of Forensic Science Forensic science is the application of natural sciences to matters of the law. In practice, forensic science draws upon physics, chemistry, biology, and other scientific principles and methods. Forensic science is concerned with the recognition, identification, individualization, and evaluation of physical evidence. Forensic scientists present their findings as expert witnesses in the court of law. The word “forensic” means “pertaining to the law”; forensic science resolves legal issues by applying scientific principles to them. Forensic Science is the application of the methods and techniques of the basic sciences to legal issues. As you can imagine Forensic Science is a very broad field of study. Crime Laboratory Scientists, sometimes called Forensic Scientists or, more properly, Criminalists, work with physical evidence collected at scenes of crimes. Forensic science is the scientific analysis and documentation of evidence suitable for legal proceedings. Many people have heard the term “forensics” used to describe school debate clubs. There is a similarity between these two forms of the word. In academic forensics, political or other issues are debated between two teams using a logical approach, and likewise in forensic science the debate (or comparison) is between the physical evidence and the known or suspected circumstances about an event. The word forensic comes from the Latin adjective forensis, meaning "of or before the forum." In Roman times, a criminal charge meant presenting the case before a group of public individuals in the forum. Both the person accused of the crime and the accuser would give speeches based on their side of the story.
    [Show full text]
  • 73Rd Aafs Annual Scientific Meeting
    AMERICAN ACADEMY OF FORENSIC SCIENCES 73RD AAFS ANNUAL SCIENTIFIC MEETING PROGRAM • FEBRUARY 2021 WELCOME MESSAGE Welcome to the 73rd American Academy of Forensic Sciences Annual Scientific Meeting. We are 100% virtual this year and it is my pleasure and excitement to greet each and every one of you. While we could not be in Houston, we have planned a jammed packed week of science, collegial interactions, collaborations, learning, social networking, and just plain fun! The Academy has nearly 6,500 members representing 70 countries. We usually meet annually in the U.S., but this year we are meeting virtually and worldwide for the first time. I cannot wait to see how many locations across the globe will be represented by our attendees. Jeri D. Ropero-Miller, PhD 2020-21 AAFS President Our meeting theme this year, One Academy Pursuing Justice through Truth and Evidence, has fueled the culture of the Academy since its inception. It has also encouraged more than 1,000 presentations for this week with over 560 oral, more that 380 posters, and countless presenters in the 18 workshops, and special sessions. The Exhibit Hall will be accessible to attendees the entire week. Don’t miss out on all the latest products and technology available to the forensic science industry. You also will want to participate in the Gamification activity by going on a virtual scavenger hunt to earn points towards winning some fun prizes. Don’t forget to visit the online AAFS store between sessions for your chance to purchase meeting apparel. I cannot thank everyone enough for all the effort, dedication, and support for making this virtual event memorable for all.
    [Show full text]
  • Synthesis of the Digital Lives Research Project
    DIGITAL >>LIVES An Initial Synthesis i Research Conference 2009 DIGITAL LIVES Personal Digital Archives for the 21st Century >> An Initial Synthesis by Jeremy Leighton John with Ian Rowlands Peter Williams Katrina Dean THIS IS VERSION 0.2 WELCOMING SUGGESTIONS & FEEDBACK AN ACCOUNT OF THE DIGITAL LIVES RESEARCH PROJECT 2009 A research project funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council Grant BLRC 8669 (Research Grants: Speculative) A Digital Lives Research Paper ii A synthesis of the Digital Lives research project, led by the British Library, in partnership with University College London and the University of Bristol, and funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council http://www.bl.uk/digital-lives/index.html The synthesis considers the curation of personal digital archives across the whole archival lifecycle Beta Version 0.2, 03 March 2010 Possible citation style: John, J. L.; I. Rowlands; P. Williams; and K. Dean (2010) Digital Lives. Personal digital archives for the 21st century >> an initial synthesis, Digital Lives Research Paper, 03 March 2010, Beta Version 0.2 All hyperlinks will be checked in subsequent versions THE PAPER PRESENTS OUTPUT OF THE DIGITAL LIVES RESEARCH PROJECT: THE OPINIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS EXPRESSED DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE POLICY OF THE BRITISH LIBRARY iii BETA VERSION: 0.2 03 March 2010 A Note on the Beta Version In the spirit of the times we are making the Initial Synthesis available first as a Beta Version. Readers are invited to send their thoughts and suggestions to the email address: [email protected] We may not be able to reply to all email messages: for one thing we do not know how many there will be, but we shall read all of them.
    [Show full text]
  • DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR MARATHWADA UNIVERSITY, AURANGABAD Syllabus of B.Sc. (Forensic Science) Third Year SEMESTER SYSTEM FIFTH
    DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR MARATHWADA UNIVERSITY, AURANGABAD Syllabus of B.Sc. (Forensic Science) Third Year SEMESTER SYSTEM FIFTH /SIXTH SEMESTER Effective from the Academic Year 2015-2016 1 B.Sc. (Forensic Science) Third Year Semester V & VI General curriculum Pattern of the course Paper Title of Paper Marks Work load Period/Week Semester Practical Total Theory Practical/ (Sem V+VI) batch V VI (Annually) I Applied Forensic Science 50 50 50 150 4 3 II Applied Forensic Chemistry 50 50 50 150 4 3 III Applied Forensic Physics 50 50 50 150 4 3 IV Applied Forensic Biology 50 50 50 150 4 3 V Applied Forensic Psychology 50 50 50 150 4 3 VI Applied Digital and Cyber 50 50 50 150 4 3 Forensics Total 300 300 300 900 * Practical examination for Semester V and Semester VI will be conducted annually for 50 marks. The concerned departments are advised to conduct maximum number of experiments from the list provided and also other experiments related to theory syllabus having forensic importance. Minimum 12 experiments (semester V and VI Combined) shall be reported in the journal for the purpose of certification. The candidate without certified journal shall not be allowed to appear for the practical examination. Curriculum structure and marking scheme for Theory Papers 2 Semester – V Course code Paper No. Title of Paper Marks BFS-5T1 I Applied Forensic Science 50 BFS-5T2 II Applied Forensic Chemistry 50 BFS-5T3 III Applied Forensic Physics 50 BFS-5T4 IV Applied Forensic Biology 50 BFS-5T5 V Applied Forensic Psychology 50 BFS-5T6 VI Applied Digital and Cyber Forensics 50 Total 300 Semester –VI Course code Paper No.
    [Show full text]
  • Calculating Likelihood Ratios for Forensic Speaker Comparisons Using Phonetic and Linguistic Parameters
    Calculating likelihood ratios for forensic speaker comparisons using phonetic and linguistic parameters Erica Ashley Gold Submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of York Department of Language and Linguistic Science Submitted January 2014 ii Abstract The research presented in this thesis examines the calculation of numerical likelihood ratios using phonetic and linguistic parameters derived from a corpus of recordings of speakers of Southern Standard British English. The research serves as an investigation into the development of the numerical likelihood ratio as a medium for framing forensic speaker comparison conclusions. The thesis begins by investigating which parameters are claimed to be the most useful speaker discriminants according to expert opinion, and in turn examines four of these ‘selected/valued’ parameters individually in relation to intra- and inter-speaker variation, their capacities as speaker discriminants, and the potential strength of evidence they yield. The four parameters analyzed are articulation rate, fundamental frequency, long-term formant distributions, and the incidence of clicks (velaric ingressive plosives). The final portion of the thesis considers the combination of the four parameters under a numerical likelihood ratio framework in order to provide an overall likelihood ratio. The contributions of this research are threefold. Firstly, the thesis presents for the first time a comprehensive survey of current forensic speaker comparison practices around the world. Secondly, it expands the phonetic literature by providing acoustic and auditory analysis, as well as population statistics, for four phonetic and linguistic parameters that survey participants have identified as effective speaker discriminants. And thirdly, it contributes to the forensic speech science and likelihood ratios for forensics literature by considering what steps can be taken to conceptually align the area of forensic iii speaker comparison with more developed areas of forensic science (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • OSAC Update and Priority Action Reports
    National Commission on Forensic Science Washington, DC May 1, 2015 OSAC Update and Priority Action Reports Jeremy Triplett, FSSB Chair George Herrin, Biology/DNA SAC Chair Scott Oulton, Chemistry/Instrumental Analysis SAC Chair Greg Davis, Crime Scene/Death Investigation SAC Chair Richard Vorder Bruegge, Digital/Multimedia SAC Chair Austin Hicklin, Physics/Pattern SAC Chair OSAC STRUCTURE FSSB Roles and Responsibilities • Oversight for all SAC, subcommittee, and resource committee operations • Review and provide final approval of Standards for inclusion in OSAC Registry • Ensure communication flow among OSAC units • Establish procedures as necessary for functioning of organization FSSB Composition • 6 members of professional forensic associations • 5 SAC chairs • 4 members of research community • 1 NIST representative Education: 7 PhDs, 2 MDs Experience: 200+ years of combined forensic experience Research: 700+ peer reviewed articles, 20+ books, 10 patents Current FSSB Priorities • Guidance and coordination between OSAC units • Organization processes and procedures • Cross-disciplinary issues • Research needs mechanism • Outreach • Calendaring for remainder of 2015 DNA / Biology George Herrin, Ph.D. DNA / Biology SAC Chair Georgia Bureau of Investigation DNA/Biology SAC • Biological Methods - standards and guidelines that support molecular and biochemical methods used to analyze evidence and reference items. • Interpretation and Reporting - standards and guidelines related to scientifically valid methods of interpretation, statistical
    [Show full text]
  • Morrison, Enzinger, Zhang (2018) Forensic Speech Science (Expert Evidence
    EXPERT EVIDENCE FORENSIC SPEECH SCIENCE CHAPTER 99 99 Forensic Speech Science Geoffrey Stewart Morrison BSc, MTS, MA, PhD Ewald Enzinger MPhil, PhD Cuiling Zhang BSc, MSc, PhD Morrison, Enzinger, Zhang 1 2017-12-19a EXPERT EVIDENCE FORENSIC SPEECH SCIENCE CHAPTER 99 © 2017 Geoffrey Stewart Morrison, Ewald Enzinger, Cuiling Zhang Morrison G.S., Enzinger E., Zhang C., 2018. Forensic speech science. In Freckelton I., Selby H. (Eds.), Expert Evidence (Ch. 99). Sydney, Australia: Thomson Reuters. A webpage related to this chapter can be found at: http://expert-evidence.forensic-voice-comparison.net/ This includes access to previous editions of Chapter 99: Morrison G.S., 2010. Forensic voice comparison. In Freckelton I., Selby H. (Eds.), Expert Evidence (Ch. 99). Sydney, Australia: Thomson Reuters. Rose P.J., 2003. The technical comparison of forensic voice samples. In Freckelton I., Selby H. (Eds.), Expert Evidence (Ch. 99). Sydney, Australia: Thomson. The present version was prepared by the authors. The publisher distributes the content in different formats. Please cite by section number, not by page number. Morrison, Enzinger, Zhang 2 2017-12-19a EXPERT EVIDENCE FORENSIC SPEECH SCIENCE CHAPTER 99 Comments on the previous edition of Chapter 99 (Morrison, 2010, Forensic voice comparison): Morrison has a very nice writing style and I think he has phrased some of the fundamental matters in a way that is more clearly put than I have ever seen. I think he has done a masterly job. Dr John S Buckleton, Principle Scientist, ESR Forensics, Auckland, New Zealand It is very informative and at the same time easy to read – a rare combination.
    [Show full text]