Former CJP Saqib Nisar denies authenticity of audio clip attributed to him

[mikkix]

 

[Patriot forever]

SC judgement defines criteria for audio, video evidence

According to the decision, the precedent cases showed that in the matter of proving an audio tape or video before a court of law, some 21 requirements are insisted upon.

1. One of them is that the person recording an audio tape or video may be a person whose part of routine duties is recording of an audio tape or video and he should not be a person who has recorded the audio tape or video for the purpose of laying a trap to procure evidence
2. Another requirement is that no audio tape or video can be relied upon by a court until the same is proved to be genuine and not tampered with or doctored. A forensic report prepared by an analyst of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, in respect of an audio tape or video is per se admissible in evidence in view of the provisions of Section 9(3) of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency Act, 2007.
3. Under Article 164 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, it lies in the discretion of a court to allow any evidence becoming available through an audio tape or video to be produced.
4. Yet another requirement is that even where a court allows an audio tape or video to be produced in evidence such audio tape or video has to be proved in accordance with the law of evidence. Accuracy of the recording must be proved and satisfactory evidence, direct or circumstantial, has to be produced so as to rule out any possibility of tampering with the record.
5. An audio tape or video sought to be produced in evidence must be the actual record of the conversation as and when it was made or of the event as and when it took place. The person recording the conversation or event has to be produced.
6. Another requirement is that the person recording the conversation or event must produce the audio tape or video himself. The audio tape or video must be played in the court. An audio tape or video produced before a court as evidence ought to be clearly audible or viewable. The person recording the conversation or event must identify the voice of the person speaking or the person seen or the voice or person seen may be identified by any other person who recognizes such voice or person.
7. Any other person present at the time of making of the conversation or taking place of the event may also testify in support of the conversation heard in the audio tape or the event shown in the video. The voices recorded or the persons shown must be properly identified.
8. The evidence sought to be produced through an audio tape or video has to be relevant to the controversy and otherwise admissible. Safe custody of the audio tape or video after its preparation till production before the court must be proved. The transcript of the audio tape or video must have been prepared under independent supervision and control.
9. Yet another requirement is that the source of an audio tape or video becoming available has to be disclosed. The date of acquiring the audio tape or video by the person producing it before the court ought to be disclosed by such person
10. An audio tape or video produced at a late stage of a judicial proceeding may be looked at with suspicion. A formal application has to be filed before the court by the person desiring an audio tape or video to be brought on the record of the case as evidence.

SC judgement defines criteria for audio, video evidence

ISLAMABAD: In its judgement on the video tape, involving suspended accountability court Judge Arshad Malik, the Supreme Court cited a number of case law in which an audio or video was either...

www.thenews.com.pk

Audio recording is not easy to prove.

Let alone the procedure of proving audio in court.

If there was even a little bit of reality to it these criminals would not have used their dogs for hire ( noorani, jang and Co) to release it.

The idea is release a fake audio (for public consumption) and do backhand dealings with the judge listening their case.

Even street robbers are more creative than these criminals. Anyone can see right through their bullshit.

 

[Dreamer.]

SC judgement defines criteria for audio, video evidence

According to the decision, the precedent cases showed that in the matter of proving an audio tape or video before a court of law, some 21 requirements are insisted upon.

1. One of them is that the person recording an audio tape or video may be a person whose part of routine duties is recording of an audio tape or video and he should not be a person who has recorded the audio tape or video for the purpose of laying a trap to procure evidence
2. Another requirement is that no audio tape or video can be relied upon by a court until the same is proved to be genuine and not tampered with or doctored. A forensic report prepared by an analyst of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, in respect of an audio tape or video is per se admissible in evidence in view of the provisions of Section 9(3) of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency Act, 2007.
3. Under Article 164 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, it lies in the discretion of a court to allow any evidence becoming available through an audio tape or video to be produced.
4. Yet another requirement is that even where a court allows an audio tape or video to be produced in evidence such audio tape or video has to be proved in accordance with the law of evidence. Accuracy of the recording must be proved and satisfactory evidence, direct or circumstantial, has to be produced so as to rule out any possibility of tampering with the record.
5. An audio tape or video sought to be produced in evidence must be the actual record of the conversation as and when it was made or of the event as and when it took place. The person recording the conversation or event has to be produced.
6. Another requirement is that the person recording the conversation or event must produce the audio tape or video himself. The audio tape or video must be played in the court. An audio tape or video produced before a court as evidence ought to be clearly audible or viewable. The person recording the conversation or event must identify the voice of the person speaking or the person seen or the voice or person seen may be identified by any other person who recognizes such voice or person.
7. Any other person present at the time of making of the conversation or taking place of the event may also testify in support of the conversation heard in the audio tape or the event shown in the video. The voices recorded or the persons shown must be properly identified.
8. The evidence sought to be produced through an audio tape or video has to be relevant to the controversy and otherwise admissible. Safe custody of the audio tape or video after its preparation till production before the court must be proved. The transcript of the audio tape or video must have been prepared under independent supervision and control.
9. Yet another requirement is that the source of an audio tape or video becoming available has to be disclosed. The date of acquiring the audio tape or video by the person producing it before the court ought to be disclosed by such person
10. An audio tape or video produced at a late stage of a judicial proceeding may be looked at with suspicion. A formal application has to be filed before the court by the person desiring an audio tape or video to be brought on the record of the case as evidence.

SC judgement defines criteria for audio, video evidence

ISLAMABAD: In its judgement on the video tape, involving suspended accountability court Judge Arshad Malik, the Supreme Court cited a number of case law in which an audio or video was either...

www.thenews.com.pk

Audio recording is not easy to prove.

These requirements on the whole are extremely stupid, especially no. 1.

It only proves that our courts themselves are against finding the truth and against ever dispensing justice.

Rest in peace, Justice.

 

[Path-Finder]

I guess you never heard him speak?

Just wait, there is more to come.

We knew what had happened & all the unraveling of the scheme is proceeding as expected.

The Insafi meltdowns are fun to read & watch. Carry on.

will garage video come out?

 

[Zibago]

On Wednesday suddenly out of no where formger GB CJ comes forward with a statement against Saqib Nisar

3 days later on Sunday an alleged audio surfaces. Again against Saqib Nasir

the confirmation of alleged audio comes from Ahmed Noorani of Geo and Jang group

You actually believe there is nothing shady about this whole affair??

And son of ex cjp did more damage to the case than PTI could even dream of

I guess you never heard him speak?

Just wait, there is more to come.

We knew what had happened & all the unraveling of the scheme is proceeding as expected.

The Insafi meltdowns are fun to read & watch. Carry on.

This clip died before someone got surkhru again

Banyaniya phir haar gaya

 

[muhammadhafeezmalik]

And son of ex cjp did more damage to the case than PTI could even dream of

This clip died before someone got surkhru again

Banyaniya phir haar gaya

Saqin Nisar should sue Ahmad Naurani and Garret Discovery in US courts.

 

[Zibago]

Saqin Nisar should sue Ahmad Naurani and Garret Discovery in US courts.

How about no

 

[mikkix]

Saqin Nisar should sue Ahmad Naurani and Garret Discovery in US courts.

Lahori dangar should present this audio as a proof against his cases in supreme court. If he doesn't it means he knows audio is fake. You guys are traitors like ptm mqm bla.

 

[Rank]

a person who organized Asma Jahangir's event literally busted Criminal Maryam and convicted criminal NS BS audio by saying "ye video he jali hey" exactly after the event in which NS bhook raha tha lol

 

[TheDarkKnight]

I guess you never heard him speak?

Just wait, there is more to come.

We knew what had happened & all the unraveling of the scheme is proceeding as expected.

The Insafi meltdowns are fun to read & watch. Carry on.

How does PMLN manage to make get these recordings and that to of a CJP of SC? Under what law was the CJP being spied upon? That is if we can independently confirm the authenticity of these recordings. But PMLN seems to have an impressive spying and eavesdropping capabilities that seems to rival state institutions- from getting compromising videos and confessions recording of Arshad Malik, to instructing judges to convict BB and then these alleged recordings.

But anyway none of these should matter in court of law, given that these are even presented as evidence in court. The convictions can be overturned only if Sharif family can provide proofs for legitimacy of their wealth - which so far has not been provided (Qatari khat, calibri font etc wont cut it).

 

[TheDarkKnight]

I guess you never heard him speak?

Just wait, there is more to come.

We knew what had happened & all the unraveling of the scheme is proceeding as expected.

The Insafi meltdowns are fun to read & watch. Carry on.

Are you involved in these schemes? Anyway it has been found to be fake:

Nisar’s audio leak ‘doctored’ | The Express Tribune

US-based company reveals that the clip was generated from at least two different sources

tribune.com.pk