Organisational-tactical peculiarities of using public representatives in the course of presentation for voice or speech recognition

Abstract

The article has identified the main organizational, tactical and legal issues of using members of the public during the presentation for recognition by voice or speech, including phonogram. The authors have concluded that the most effective in terms of organizational implementation of this investigative (search) action, in terms of involvement of mutes, experts, witnesses, there is always lack of cooperation with NGOs, volunteers, representatives of labor collectives and cultural community. They have developed and proposed algorithms for using members of the public as: 1) persons who are presented together with the suspect as «mutes» for identification by «live» voice; 2) persons who perform the role of a source for the creation of audio samples of the voice (when recognizing by phonogram); 3)professionals to create audio samples of the voice (when recognizing by phonogram); 4) professionals to establish possible changes in the voice of the person to be identified; 5) witnesses involved in order to certify the correctness and objectivity of the recording of the content, course and results of the presentation for recognition by voice or speech. For this purpose typical investigative situations that arise in the case of the use of members of the public during the presentation for identification by voice and speech have been identified, in particular: 1. In the use of members of the public as persons who are presented together with the suspect as «extras» for identification by a «live» voice, typical investigative situations include: 1) discrepancy between the characteristics of the voice (volume, intelligibility of speech, timbre, gender of the person, etc.) of colleagues or persons who are in «close access» and the characteristics of the person’s voice presented for identification; 2) refusal of colleagues or persons who are in «close access» to participate in this investigative (search) action as a mute, etc.; 3) the investigator’s inability to determine the characteristics of mutes’ voices at the stage of preparation for the investigative (search) action. 2. When using members of the public as persons who act as a source for the creation of audio samples of the voice (when recognizing by phonogram), the authors have identified the following typical investigative situations: 1) the sound of the created phonogram (signal) does not correspond to «living» voices, or is perceived differently; 2) the number of pronounced words and phrases or their sequence is insufficient for recognition by the recognizing person, etc. 3. When using members of the public as specialists to create audio samples of the voice (when recognizing by phonogram), the following tactical situations may arise: 1) lack of opportunity to involve an expert; 2) conducting an investigative (search) action in remote settlements.