Is audio forensics valid, and how is audio forensics legal and valid?

In order for audio and video evidence to become the basis for a judgment, three conditions must be met at the same time: First, the audio-visual materials should provide the original carrier. The audio or video evidence presented by the parties has not been edited, edited, or forged, is closely connected, and the content has not been tampered with, and has objective authenticity and coherence.

Second, there should be no doubts about audio-visual materials. When the court uses the audio or video evidence as the basis for adjudicating a case, it should also examine whether the audio or video evidence is suspicious. If the opposing party challenges the recording and adduces sufficient evidence to refute it, the recording evidence loses its probative force.

Third, it is necessary to provide sufficient other evidence. Where one party raises objections to "undoubted audio-visual materials or copies that are verified with the audio-visual materials that are supported by other evidence and obtained by lawful means, or copies that are verified to be correct with the audio-visual materials", the people's court shall confirm its probative force. Therefore, in order to improve the success rate, in addition to providing audio-visual materials with legal and undoubted points, it is also necessary to provide other evidentiary materials as much as possible to increase the probative power of audio-visual materials.

In addition, when using the method of secretly recording to collect the evidence they need, they should try to use advanced recording equipment. In the actual operation process, try to choose a place with less noise interference to record. In the clandestine recording, you should first indicate your identity and recording time, and skillfully guide or prompt the other party to identify yourself, so as to enhance the credibility of the evidence.

It should be effective, especially in the insurance industry, where recording forensics is very effective.

As long as it can be guaranteed to be true, it is effective.

The complete one that has not been edited can be used as evidence, and of course the court will require you to submit a text collation version, which must be truthfully organized.

Introduction: When making court appeals, some people will use audio recordings with the parties as evidence. Sometimes such evidence is legal and valid, but sometimes it is illegal and invalid, so what can be done to make your recording evidence legal and valid?

1. Secretly recorded recordings depend on the situation, in fact, most of the recordings are secretly recorded without the knowledge of one party, so whether the recordings secretly recorded when the other party is not aware can be used as evidence, in fact, to a large extent, can be used as evidence, for example, if you and the other party are ** or recorded in the process of face-to-face communication, in fact, these are legal and effective. But in addition, if some people go too far, for example, install some equipment in other people's places of work, or in other people's homes, and then record other people's words and words for monitoring, this is very serious, and this is actually violating other people's rights and interests, which is not legal and ineffective.

2. The collection of audio recordings should be effectiveIn addition, the evidence of recording is actually very easy to modify, and if the judge thinks that this evidence is valid, then it is best to be complete and clear when recording, and not to delete and edit it indiscriminately. Of course, the effect of the audio in the recording must be related to the content of the lawsuit, if you talk about something meaningless or in fact, the other party did not give any clear answer in the process, and you don't know who is right and who is wrong after listening to the recording, then even if such a recording can become some evidence, but it can't support any point of view.

3. The collected recordings should be completeThe recordings used as evidence must be complete。Some people feel that it is not very beneficial to themselves after recording, and then they edit it, and want to cut the content of the recording to be more beneficial to themselves, such a recording is complete, so it cannot be used as evidence. Moreover, the text version of the recording should still be sorted out when it is used as evidence, so that everyone can see it clearly in court.

As long as the recording is carried out under the condition that both parties agree to the recording, this is very legal and effective, otherwise any other recording obtained by improper means will have no effect and legal effect.

It must be to obtain some favorable proof, and it must not involve other people's privacy, and the recording must be placed on oneself, or the recording must be placed in some public place, so that it can be counted as legal and valid.

What he said was useful, he asked you to transfer the post because it was a reason, and it was embarrassing for him to let you record it, and the two of them recorded it, standing and talking, it didn't hurt to have a backache.

As long as you don't record someone else's private question, the location, and the fact that there is no change in the middle of the guest can be used as evidence.

It must be obtained through normal channels, and it must also be reviewed, without any doubts, and the content must be very clear and unambiguous.

According to the law, evidence of illegal takeover cannot be used as valid evidence, and if the evidence of audio recording is illegally obtained, it still cannot be used as valid evidence.

Article 70 of the Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings provides:

Where one party submits the following evidence, and the other party raises objections but does not have sufficient evidence to the contrary, the people's court shall confirm its probative force:

Audio-visual materials that are supported by other evidence and obtained by lawful means, and which are beyond doubt, or copies that have been verified with the audio-visual materials;

This provision sets out clear restrictions on audiovisual materials, starting with the requirement that they have been obtained by lawful means.

In judicial practice, this depends on the analysis of specific situations

If it is in person with the other party or in the process of communication, secretly record the audio-visual evidence obtained during the communication between the two parties. It is generally considered to be lawfully obtained and valid.

If audio-visual evidence is obtained by placing secretly recording equipment in another person's residence, workplace, or other illegal means, it is generally considered not to have been lawfully obtained and is invalid.

1. Can audio recordings be used as legal evidence?

Audio recordings may also be used as evidence, depending on the circumstances. If the evidence is obtained by methods that infringe upon the lawful rights and interests of others or violate the prohibitive provisions of the law, it cannot be used as the basis for determining the facts of the case. On the other hand, if the audio or video recording materials without the consent of the relevant parties do not infringe upon the lawful rights and interests of others, nor do they violate the prohibitions of the law, then the audio and video recordings may be used as the basis for a verdict.

Although the audio recording materials secretly recorded without the consent of the other party do not infringe on the legitimate rights and interests of the other party, nor do they violate the prohibitions of the law, they can be used as evidence to protect their own legitimate interests. However, if there is only one single piece of evidence and no other evidence to support it, then the probative force of this recording evidence is still lacking. Therefore, it is better to find some other evidence to corroborate it.

II. What should be paid attention to when collecting audio and video evidence.

The audio evidence presented by the parties is genuine. The authenticity of the recording evidence is manifested in the fact that it has not been edited or forged, that it is closely connected, that the content has not been altered, and that it is original and coherent. Legitimacy of the recording evidence.

Article 68 of the Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings stipulates that: "Evidence obtained by means that infringe upon the lawful rights and interests of others or violate the prohibitive provisions of the law cannot be used as the basis for determining the facts of a case." "Recorded evidence should have a certain amount of probative force.

Where the other party recognizes the recording materials, or submits a rebuttal but does not have sufficient evidence to prove it, and the reasons for the rebuttal are not sustained, the people's court shall confirm its probative force.

Legal analysis: In order to make audio and video evidence legal, three conditions must be met at the same time: first, the audio-visual materials should be provided with the original carrier; Second, there should be no doubts about audio-visual materials. Third, it is necessary to fully provide other evidence, such as blocking.

When using the method of secretly recording to collect the evidence they need, they should try to use advanced recording equipment. In the actual operation process, try to choose a place with less noise interference to record.

Legal basis: Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China

Article 63: Types of evidence include: (1) the parties' statements; (2) documentary evidence; (3) Physical evidence; (4) audio-visual materials; (5) Electronic data; (6) Witness testimony; (7) Appraisal opinions; (8) Inquest records. Evidence must be verified to be true before it can be used as a basis for determining facts.

Article 71: People's courts shall distinguish the authenticity of audio-visual materials, and review and determine whether they can be used as a basis for determining facts in conjunction with other evidence in the case.