PROSPECTS FOR INCREASING RELIABILITY IN VERBAL INVESTIGATIVE ACTIONS USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TOOLS
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Kazakhstan has prioritised digitalising its criminal justice processes, implementing AI-driven tools such as automated forensic systems and "digital autopsy" platforms to increase efficiency and transparency. However, challenges persist: interrogation recordings can still be falsified or incomplete due to inadequate technical equipment and procedural gaps, undermining evidence integrity. This study investigates a combined AI-blockchain framework to enhance the reliability of verbal investigative actions. It examines an integrated system in which automatic speech recognition (ASR) transcribes interrogation audio, and a private blockchain ledger immutably timestamps each transcript. The study employs a mixed-methods approach: data include recorded criminal interrogation sessions (audio transcripts) and relevant legal documents. A neural ASR model was trained on these transcripts (approximately 50 sessions) to produce digital text, and standard analytical methods were applied to evaluate system performance. Simultaneously, each transcript was recorded on a blockchain registry, and metrics such as transcription accuracy and error rate were measured. Results show the proposed system attains high transcription accuracy (94% word recognition) and significantly reduces manual review time (by about 40%). In experiments, word error rates dropped from roughly 10% (baseline) to 5% with the ASR model, and the blockchain ledger recorded 100% of transcripts with negligible overhead. The findings suggest that integrating AI-driven transcription with blockchain anchoring markedly enhances the fidelity of investigative recordings. Quantitatively, the AI-blockchain platform halved transcription errors and enabled reliable reconstruction of interrogation timelines. These results indicate the combined approach substantially improves the reliability and integrity of verbal evidence, reinforcing the objective completeness of recorded testimony.
JEL Classification Codes: K10, K24, K40, K14.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Adkins, J., Al Bataineh, A., & Khanal, A. (2025). A psycholinguistic NLP framework for forensic text analysis of deception and emotion. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 8, 1669542. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2025.1669542 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2025.1669542
Atlam, H. F., Ekuri, N., Azad, M. A., & Lallie, H. S. (2024). Blockchain forensics: A systematic literature review of techniques, applications, challenges, and future directions. Electronics, 13(17), 3568. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13173568 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13173568
Brennen, T., & Magnussen, S. (2022). The Science of lie detection by verbal cues: what are the prospects for its practical applicability?. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 835285. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.835285 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.835285
Batista, D., Mangeth, A. L., Frajhof, I., Alves, P. H., Nasser, R., Robichez, G., ... & Miranda, F. P. D. (2023). Exploring blockchain technology for chain of custody control in physical evidence: A systematic literature review. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 16(8), 360. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm16080360 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm16080360
Dasaklis, T. K., Casino, F., & Patsakis, C. (2020). Sok: Blockchain solutions for forensics. Technology Development for Security Practitioners. Springer: Berlin, Germany. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2005.12640 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69460-9_2
Diepeveen, A. (2024). The suspect's statement in interaction: Responding to ‘formulations’ in the investigative interview. Journal of Pragmatics, 220, 47-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2023.11.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2023.11.010
Fu-Ching, T. (2021). The Application of Blockchain of Custody in Criminal Investigation Process. Procedia Computer Science, 192, 2779–2788. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.09.048
Garcia, J. P., Grilo, C., Domingues, P., & Miragaia, R. (2025). INTU-AI: Digitalization of Police Interrogation Supported by Artificial Intelligence. Applied Sciences, 15(19), 10781. https://doi.org/10.3390/app151910781 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app151910781
Gilbert, D., & Heydon, G. (2021). Translated transcripts from covert recordings used for evidence in court: Issues of reliability. Frontiers in Communication, 6, 779227. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.779227 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.779227
Grabman, J. H., Dobbins, I. G., & Dodson, C. S. (2024). Comparing human evaluations of eyewitness statements to a machine learning classifier under pristine and suboptimal lineup administration procedures. Cognition, 251, 105876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105876 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105876
Greenspan, R. L., Lyman, A., & Heaton, P. (2024). Assessing Verbal Eyewitness Confidence Statements Using Natural Language Processing. Psychological Science, 35(3), 277–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976241229028 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976241229028
Gustafsson, P. U., Lachmann, T., & Laukka, P. (2025). Machine Learning Predicts Accuracy in Eyewitnesses’ Voices. J Nonverbal Behav, 49, 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-024-00474-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-024-00474-9
Harrington, L. (2023). Incorporating automatic speech recognition methods into the transcription of police-suspect interviews: factors affecting automatic performance. Frontiers in Communication, 8, 1165233. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2023.1165233 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2023.1165233
Haworth, K., Tompkinson, J., Richardson, E., Deamer, F., & Hamann, M. (2023). “For the Record”: applying linguistics to improve evidential consistency in police investigative interview records. Frontiers in Communication, 8, 1178516. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2023.1178516 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2023.1178516
Kapase, A., Uke, N., Savant, J., Desai, M., Ghatage, S., & Rahangdale, A. (2024, August). "AffectAlchemy": An Affective Dataset Based on Plutchik’s Psychological Model for Text-Based Emotion Recognition and its Analysis Using ML Techniques. In 2024 8th International Conference on Computing, Communication, Control and Automation (ICCUBEA) (pp. 1-6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCUBEA61740.2024.10775193 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCUBEA61740.2024.10775193
Khassanov, Y., Mussakhojayeva, S., Mirzakhmetov, A., Adiyev, A., Nurpeiissov, M., & Varol, H. A. (2021). A crowdsourced open-source Kazakh speech corpus and initial speech recognition baseline. 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Proceedings of the Conference. Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), 697–706. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.eacl-main.58 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.eacl-main.58
King, S. L., & Neal, T. (2024). Applications of AI-Enabled Deception Detection Using Video, Audio, and Physiological Data: A Systematic Review. IEEE, 12, 135207–135240. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3462825 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3462825
Kumar, M. (2020). Applications of blockchain in digital forensics and forensics readiness. In Blockchain for Cybersecurity and Privacy, CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 339–364. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429324932-20 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429324932-20
Lai, M. (2023). Transcribing and translating forensic speech evidence containing foreign languages—An Australian perspective. Frontiers in Communication, 8, 1096639. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2023.1096639 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2023.1096639
Loakes, D. (2022). Does Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) Have a Role in the Transcription of Indistinct Covert Recordings for Forensic Purposes? Frontiers in Communication, 7, 803452. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.803452 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.803452
Loakes, D. (2024). Automatic speech recognition and the transcription of indistinct forensic audio: how do the new generation of systems fare?. Frontiers in Communication, 9, 1281407. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2024.1281407 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2024.1281407
Melis, G., Ursino, M., Scarpazza, C., Zangrossi, A., & Sartori, G. (2024). Detecting lies in investigative interviews through the analysis of response latencies and error rates to unexpected questions. Scientific reports, 14(1), 12268. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-63156-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-63156-y
Minhas, R., Elphick, C., & Shaw, J. (2022). Protecting victim and witness statement: examining the effectiveness of a chatbot that uses artificial intelligence and a cognitive interview. AI & SOCIETY, 37(1), 265-281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01165-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01165-5
Quigley-McBride, A., & Greenspan, R. L. (2025). Using confidence, decision time, and confidence entropy to predict accuracy for online and real eyewitnesses. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 31006. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-16274-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-16274-0
Quijano-Sanchez, L., Liberatore, F., Camacho-Collados, J., & Camacho-Collados, M. (2018). Applying automatic text-based detection of deceptive language to police reports: Extracting behavioral patterns from a multi-step classification model to understand how we lie to the police. Knowledge-Based Systems, 149, 155-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2018.03.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2018.03.010
Radford, A., Kim, J. W., Xu, T., Brockman, G., McLeavey, C., & Sutskever, I. (2023). Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning Research. Honolulu, HI, USA, 28492–28518. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.04356
Ratul, M. H. A., Mollajafari, S., & Wynn, M. (2024). Managing Digital Evidence in Cybercrime: Efforts Towards a Sustainable Blockchain-Based Solution. Sustainability, 16(24), 10885. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162410885 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su162410885
Raver, A., Lindholm, T., Gustafsson, P. U., & Alm, C. (2023). Memory accuracy, suggestibility and credibility in investigative interviews with native and non-native eyewitnesses. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1240822. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1240822 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1240822
Richardson, E., Kate Haworth, K., & Felicity Deamer, F. (2022). For the Record: Questioning Transcription Processes in Legal Contexts, Applied Linguistics, 43(4), 677–697. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amac005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amac005
Sakshi, Malik, A., & Sharma, A. K. (2023). Blockchain-based digital chain of custody multimedia evidence preservation framework for internet-of-things. Journal of Information Security and Applications, 77, 103579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jisa.2023.103579 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jisa.2023.103579
Sergidou, E. K., Ypma, R., Rohdin, J., Worring, M., Geradts, Z., & Bosma, W. (2024). Fusing linguistic and acoustic information for automated forensic speaker comparison. Science & Justice, 64(5), 485-497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2024.07.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2024.07.001
Sigona, F., & Grimaldi, M. (2024). Validation of an ECAPA-TDNN system for Forensic Automatic Speaker Recognition under case work conditions. Speech Communication, 158, 103045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2024.103045 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2024.103045
Skipanes, M., Demartini, G., Franke, K., & Nissen, A. B. (2025). Information analysis in criminal investigations: methods, challenges, and computational opportunities processing unstructured text. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 19, paaf005. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paaf005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paaf005
Shin, J., Jo, E., Yoon, Y., & Jung, J. (2023). A System for Interviewing and Collecting Statements Based on Intent Classification and Named Entity Recognition Using Augmentation. Applied Sciences, 13(20), 11545. https://doi.org/10.3390/app132011545 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app132011545
Shurdumov, A. A. (2025). Blockchain verification of evidence in criminal proceedings. Law and Right, 8, 226–230.
Stoykova, R., Porter, K., & Beka, T. (2024). The AI Act in a law enforcement context: The case of automatic speech recognition for transcribing investigative interviews. Forensic Science International: Synergy, 9, 100563 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100563 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100563
Tomas, F., Dodier, O., & Demarchi, S. (2022). Computational measures of deceptive language: Prospects and issues. Frontiers in Communication, 7, 792378. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.792378 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.792378
Vogler, N., & Pearl, L. (2020). Using linguistically defined specific details to detect deception across domains. Natural Language Engineering, 26(3), 349–373. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324919000408 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324919000408
Yang, M., An, Q., & Zheng, L. (2024). The Spatial Effect of Digital Economy Enabling Common Prosperity—An Empirical Study of the Yellow River Basin. Systems, 12(11), 500. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems12110500 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/systems12110500
Zang, Y., Li, S., Lou, Y., & Liu, S. (2022). Value and Method: the Application of Blockchain Technology in the Field of Criminal Evidence. Proceedings of the 2022 6th International Seminar on Education, Management and Social Sciences (ISEMSS 2022), 2514–2522. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-494069-31-2_296 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-494069-31-2_296
Zhou, C., Zhang, Y., Lin, C., & Zhou, S. (2025). A deception detection model by using integrated LLM with emotion features. Scientific Reports, 15, 32135. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-17741-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-17741-4