Selected publications (forensic)

NOTE: you can find a guided reading list at

Fraser, H. in prep. Forensic transcription: Legal and scientific challenges. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Eades, D., Fraser, H., & Heydon, G. in prep. Forensic Linguistics in Australia: Origins, development and status. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fraser, H. in press. Applied phonetics and phonology. In L. Wei, Z. Hua, & J. Simpson (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Applied Linguistics (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Fraser, H. 2022. A framework for deciding how to create and evaluate transcripts for forensic and other purposes. Frontiers in Communication, 7 (Capturing Talk), 898410.

Fraser, H. 2022. Forensic transcription: Legal and scientific perspectives. In C. Bernardasci, D. Dipino, D. Garassino, E. Pellegrino, S. Negrinelli, & S. Schmid (Eds.), Speaker Individuality in Phonetics and Speech Sciences: Speech Technology and Forensic Applications (pp. 19–32). Milano: Officinaventuno.

Fraser, H. 2021. The development of legal procedures for using a transcript to assist the jury in understanding indistinct covert recordings used as evidence in Australian criminal trials: A history in three key cases. Language and Law / Linguagem e Direito, 8(1), 59–75.

Fraser, H., & Kinoshita, Y. 2021. Injustice arising from the unnoticed power of priming: How lawyers and even judges can be misled by unreliable transcripts of indistinct forensic audio. Criminal Law Journal, 45(3) 142-152.

Fraser, H. 2021. How misconceptions about transcription affect the criminal justice system. Tiro: The journal of professional reporting and transcription. 

Fraser, H., & Loakes, D. 2020. Acoustic injustice: The experience of listening to indistinct covert recordings presented as evidence in court. Law Text Culture 24 (Special Issue: The Acoustics of Justice), 405-429

Fraser, H. 2020. Forensic transcription: The case for transcription as a dedicated branch of linguistic science. In M. Coulthard, A. Johnson, & R. Sousa-Silva (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics (2nd ed). Routledge. Chapter 26, 416-431

Fraser, H. 2020. Introducing the Research Hub for Language in Forensic Evidence. Judicial Officers’ Bulletin, 32(11), 117-118.

Fraser, H. 2020. Enhancing forensic audio: What works, what doesn’t, and why. Griffith Journal of Law and Human Dignity, 8(1), 85-102.

Fraser, H. 2019. The reliability of voice recognition by ear witnesses: An overview of research findings. Language and Law/Linguagem E Direito, 6(2), 1–9.

Fraser, H. 2019. Don’t believe your ears: ‘Enhancing’ forensic audio can mislead juries in criminal trialsThe Conversation.

Fraser, H. 2019. Enhancing and priming at a voir dire: can we be sure the judge reached the right conclusion? Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences.

Fraser, H. 2019. “Enhancing” forensic audio: what if all that really gets enhanced is the credibility of a misleading transcript? Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences.

Fraser, H. 2019. The role of native speakers in LADO: Are we missing a more important question. In Patrick, P. L., Schmid, M. S., & Zwaan, K. (Eds.) Language Analysis for the Determination of Origin. Springer. pre-publication version – read but don’t quote!

French, P., & Fraser, H. 2018. Why “ad hoc experts” should not provide transcripts of indistinct forensic audio, and a proposal for a better approach. Criminal Law Journal, 42, 298–302.

Fraser, H. 2018. Covert recordings used as evidence in criminal trials: concerns of Australian linguists. Judicial Officers Bulletin, 30(6), 53–56.

Fraser, H. 2018. ‘Enhancing’ forensic audio: false beliefs and their effect in criminal trialsAustralian Journal of Forensic Sciences.

Fraser, H. 2018 Review of ‘Forensic communication in theory and practice’, edited by Orletti and MariottiniLanguage and Law/Linguagem e Direito 5(1), 103-108

Fraser, H. 2018. Forensic transcription: How confident false beliefs about language and speech threaten the right to a fair trial in Australia. Australian Journal of Linguistics

Fraser, H. 2018. Thirty years is long enough: It’s time to create a process that ensures covert recordings used as evidence in court are interpreted reliably and fairly. Journal of Judicial Administration 27:30 95-104

Fraser, H. 2018. Real forensic experts should pay more attention to the dangers posed by “ad hoc experts” (Guest Editorial). Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences 50(2) 125-128

Fraser, H. 2018. “Assisting” listeners to hear words that aren’t there: dangers in using police transcripts of indistinct covert recordings. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences 50(2) 129-139

Fraser, H. 2017. How interpretation of indistinct covert recordings can lead to wrongful conviction: A case study and recommendations for reform. In R. Levy, et al (Eds.), New directions for law in Australia. Canberra: ANU Press p.191-200

Burridge, K. 2017. The dark side of mondegreens: How a simple mishearing can lead to wrongful conviction. The Conversation.

Fraser, H. 2015. Transcription of indistinct covert recordings used as evidence in criminal trials: Problems and solutions. In H. Selby & I. Freckelton, eds. Expert Evidence. Thomson Reuters.

Fraser, H., 2014. Transcription of indistinct forensic recordings: Problems and solutions from the perspective of phonetic scienceLanguage and Law/Linguagem e Direito, 1(2), pp.5–21.

Fraser, H. & Stevenson, B., 2014. The power and persistence of contextual priming: More risks in using police transcripts to aid jurors’ perception of poor quality covert recordings. International Journal of Evidence and Proof. 18 (3) 205-229.

Fraser, H. 2013. Covert recordings as evidence in court: The return of police “verballing?” The Conversation.

Fraser, H., 2013. Hard-to-hear covert recordings used as evidence in criminal cases: Have we brought back police ‘verballing’? In K. Richards & J. Tauri, eds. Crime Justice and Social Democracy: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference Volume 1. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology, pp. 67–76.

Fraser, H., 2012. Bayes and beyond: The complex challenges of LADO and their relevance to forensic speaker comparison. In Donohue, C., Ishihara, S. & Steed, W. eds. Quantitative approaches to problems in linguistics: Studies in honour of Phil Rose, Munich: LINCOM Europa.

Fraser, H., 2011. Language analysis for the determination of origin (LADO). In C. A. Chapelle, ed. Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Wiley-Blackwell.

Fraser, H., 2011. The role of linguists and native speakers in language analysis for the determination of speaker origin: A response to Tina Cambier-Langeveld. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 18(1), pp.121–130.

Fraser, H., Stevenson, B. & Marks, T. 2011. Interpretation of a Crisis Call: Persistence of a primed perception of a disputed utterance. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 18(2), pp.261–292.

Fraser, H., 2009. The role of “educated native speakers” in providing language analysis for the determination of the origin of asylum seekers. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 16(1), pp.113–138.

Language and National Origin Group, 2004. Guidelines for the use of language analysis in relation to questions of national origin in refugee cases. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 11(2), pp.1–6.

Fraser, H., 2003. Issues in transcription: factors affecting the reliability of transcripts as evidence in legal cases. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 10(2), pp.203–226. NOTE: The explanation of why the current system is not good remain useful, but I have changed the recommendations for a better approach