The International Society of Voice Stress Analysts



                A paper presented to the International Society of Stress Analysts by
A. F. Starewich
Audio Stress Analyst


Introduction: The American System of justice is founded on an adversarial balance
between the prosecution and defense. A main component and assumption of this system

is that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. Further, the accused has a right to a

fair and impartial trial which includes an adequate defense.


 A cornerstone in maintaining the principal that the accused obtain fair trial includes adequate defense. Our modern
system of justice provides the indigent defendant with an attorney appointed by the court if he or she cannot afford
one. In larger municipalities, the Public Defender's Office may have a well funded and staffed office which includes
attorneys, investigators and clerical staff. Smaller municipalities do not fare as well. Many small communities have 
little or no budget for Public Defense, particularly where technical experts and investigators are needed to provide
a proper defense for the accused.

 Recent criminal trials have boldly displayed the benefit of extensive financial resources in the outcome of a verdict. The
 imperfection of the system became starkly apparent to the en tire nation. For decades, it has been the outcry of the
underdog that there are two systems of justice. one for the rich, and one for the poor. Altruistically, the Public

 Defender's Office should provide the same excellence of personnel and resources as the Prosecutor's Office. Any
experienced professional involved in the criminal justice system knows this is, at most, is an idealistic, but unrealistic
notion. In many cases, the Public Defender's Office had been relegated to function as a deal maker or plea bargain office.
In the worst case scenario, the Public Defender may simply be an arm of the Prosecutor's office in expediting the indigent
accused through the Criminal Justice System while maintaining the semblance of justice for all.

Through checks and balances, the accused is provided with many protections. Arrests should not be made without
probable cause. Arraignments, pretrial hearings, discovery, etc., provide further checks and balances that the citizen
has not been wrongfully accused and / or indicted. Countless surveys have determined that the public believes
that most citizens that have been arrested for a crime are probably guilty. This, of course, displays basic faith in our
criminal justice system. Statistically, their beliefs are probably proven out.


In any case, innocent or guilty, our system demands that the accused, rich or poor, receive a fair and impartial trial.
With this in mind, tile indigent accused will receive the same defense as the wealthy accused who can pay a million dollar
retainer to a dream team. Get real!

In defense of the Public Defender, many dedicated attorneys have devoted their lives to providing the best defense possible
under extremely adverse conditions. In. making the best of a bad situation, public defenders have acquitted countless
innocent citizens. Unfortunately, many innocent citizens have copped a plea rather than face the power and might of a well
staffed Prosecutor's Office.

In a recent murder case in a large municipality, a white middle aged man on full disability was arrested and tried for murder
involving a motor vehicle. He was indigent and appointed a public defender. The first trial resulted in a hung jury. In
the second trial, he was convicted and awaited sentencing for one count of murder and three counts of attempted murder.

The above accused had the good fortune of obtaining a skilled and dedicated public defender. In the course of the two trials,
the public defender employed the services of accident reconstruction experts and investigators. Unfortunately, even these
resources paled in comparison to the money and manpower employed by the Prosecutor's Office. Undaunted by the
conviction, the public defender maintained belief in his client's innocence and employed the services of another private

The investigator reviewed trial transcripts, evidence and witness statements. Due to a limited budget, all witness were not
re-interviewed. The accused was administered an Audio Stress Analysis Test. The results were conclusive that tile accused
was not guilty of the crime's he had been convicted of.  Assured by this information, the investigator determined that one or
more of the witnesses provided perjured testimony in both trials.

As an agent of the court, supplied with audio tape recordings of all the witnesses involved in the fatal incident, the investigator
analyzed the statements of each witness utilizing audio stress analysis and readily determined which witnesses were lying. The
above investigation resulted in one witness coming forward and changing his statements to the police and on the witness stand.

The above information resulted in a plea bargain where the accused was offered an extremely reduced sentence. He is
currently serving a five year term sentence versus a twenty-five-to-life. Realistically, this was a "good deal". He will be out on
parole before he could go through the process of yet another lengthy trial. From a purely judicial standpoint, an innocent man
is in prison, making the best of a bad situation.

 The above case is but one example of the balance of justice working, if not perfectly, in our judicial system. Although
ruled inadmissible except under stipulation, in most jurisdictions, the use of lie detectors still plays a major role in the pretrial
stages of civil and criminal cases.

The inadmissibility of a lie detector test can be argued from now to eternity, but the truth of the matter, as it stands, is that
it is simply utilized as an investigative tool. Almost all federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies utilize the polygraph.
Over six hundred U.S. law enforcement agencies utilize Audio Stress Analysis in one form or another, despite it's
 inadmissibility in court. Surprisingly few professionals in the criminal justice system are aware of the twenty-year battle that
has been raging between the efficacy of the polygraph versus Audio Stress Analysis. Even more surprising is the fact that
even fewer criminal justice professionals are even aware of Audio Stress Analysis technology despite the tens of thousands
of conclusive tests that have been conducted worldwide, by qualified examiners utilizing various versions of the proven

For the purposes of this paper, we will assume that Audio Stress Analysis is a proven medium in the detection of truth and
deception. Given this assumption, we must compare it with the polygraph and how both instruments relate to use within the
Public Defense sector of the criminal justice system.

The results obtained in the above criminal case above would have been impossible utilizing the polygraph. In order to
accomplish what the Audio Stress Analyst accomplished from his office, bulky equipment and an examination room would
have been necessary to test the defendant. In addition, each and every witness would have had to be mirandized, physically
present, and tested in a controlled environment. The test would have required yes or no answers where our use of narrative
analysis of witnesses divulged deception leading to further investigation. In other words, the Audio Stress Analyst did not
know what he was looking for. Through narrative analysis of statements he was able to determine deception in details of
witness statements. Further, he was able to ascertain the truthfulness of other witnesses.

The cost factor and logistics comparing audio stress analysis versus the polygraph are exponential. Legally, in most
jurisdictions, an agent of the court, in this case, an Audio Stress Analyst, can analyze any tape-recorded statements made to
police or other court officials without their consent. The invasion of privacy is of course, always at stake. Given the fact that
we as agents of the court, are seeking truth in the furtherance of justice, the abuse factor of a covert system dims in
comparison to the benefits of clearing innocent citizens prior to lengthy trials.

 Most defense attorneys will argue that truth or innocence is immaterial when charged with the defense of the accused. Even
so, most attorneys desire to know if, in fact their client is innocent Audio Stress Analysis is the most expedient, cost effective and conclusive way of determining an accused citizen's guilt or innocence. The fact that the results are inadmissible lean toward the defense, creating a win/win situation. If test results in fact, indicate innocence, most dedicated defense attorneys
will make the court aware of the results, and given their credibility, along with the test results, may get the charges dropped,
or at least,  force the Prosecutor to conduct further investigations prior to a indictment or trial.

Given the limited budget and time constraints imposed on even the most sophisticated Public Defender's Office, use of Audio
Stress Analysis has proven to be an invaluable tool. Public awareness and expanded use of this technology can only enhance
the criminal justice system. Ideally, it will reduce the number of innocent citizens accused of crime, leaving more resources for
the pursuit, apprehension and conviction of the guilty who are truly threats to society.




 [ TOP ]    [ ISSA ]