The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.
For years, movies and television series like Crime Scene Investigation $\text{(CSI)}$ paint an unrealistic picture of the “science of voices.” In the $1994$ movie Clear and Present Danger an expert listens to a brief recorded utterance and declares that the speaker is “Cuban, aged $35$ to $45$, educated in the [$\dots$] eastern United States.” The recording is then fed to a supercomputer that matches the voice to that of a suspect, concluding that the probability of correct identification is $90$%. This sequence sums up a good number of misimpression about forensic phonetics, which have led to errors in real-life justice. Indeed, that movie scene exemplifies the so-called “CSI effect”$-$the phenomenon in which judges hold unrealistic expectations of the capabilities of forensic science.
- Although voice recognition is often presented as evidence in legal cases, its scientific basis can be shaky.
- Movies and televisions have led to the belief that the use of forensic phonetics in legal investigations is robust and fool proof.
- Voice recognition as used in many movies to identify criminals has been used to identify criminals in real life also.
- Voice recognition has started to feature prominently in crime-scene intelligence investigations because of movies and television series.