That's interesting--the FBI should have the equipment and the expertise to determine and yet they cannot.
I would not be surprised if the defense found two or three experts insisting on the opposite.
This talks about how one of the experts seems to have a financial stake in this. The second expert admits to have never heard Martin's voice
I think that's what they should try and see, if anyone rules out, not rules in as the source of the voice, according to this, anyway.And standards set by the American Board of Recorded Evidence indicate "there must be at least 10 comparable words between two voice samples to reach a minimal decision criteria." While Zimmerman says more than that many words on his 911 call, the only one heard on the second is a cry for "help."
But that board's current chairman Gregg Stutchman -- who described Owens as a friend and well-respected in their field -- said that exact metric doesn't necessarily apply to the software Owens used.
David Faigman, a professor of law at the University of California-Hastings and an expert on the admissibility of scientific evidence, said courts and the overall scientific community have mixed opinions about the reliability of such "voiceprint" analysis.
Because one goal in the Martin case might be ruling out Zimmerman as the source of the screams, rather than precisely identifying who actually was yelling, it could lower the bar for getting such evidence into court, he said.