Azubuike c. R.

Superior Court of Québec · QC · Canada · 2024-05-09 · 2024 QCCS 1654 · 500-01-207497-204

ExcludedAlleged voice cloneaudiooffered by prosecutionchallenge: expert-required

The accused alleged eight customer-service recordings were voice clones and offered a proposed expert. After a voir dire, the court found the expert unqualified and excluded his report and testimony, while leaving the recordings’ ultimate authenticity to be addressed through other evidence.

Rules cited: Mohan expert evidence test · Canada Evidence Act s.31.1

The court's finding, in its words

The proposed voice-cloning expert was not qualified; his report and testimony were excluded.

Short verbatim extract (≤25 words) for identification; the judgment is linked below and is the record.

Decision: canlii.org
Read: 2026-09-07 · primary document read
Found via: Damien Charlotin deepfakes lead CSV (CC0), User brief named-case list
Notes: CanLII page could not be independently read by script; downloaded lead PDF copy was read.

No alleged media is hosted or linked. Where the court found material genuine or fabricated, the finding is the court's; where a party merely alleged it, this page says so. Publication restrictions have not yet been checked for this row. This record summarises a public court document or official publication and reports what it says; SafeLegalAI makes no findings of its own. Individuals and organisations are named only as they appear in that public record. Anyone named may send a right of reply, correction or contextual update (for example an appeal, vacatur or later disposition) via /report; we add a dated note where appropriate. Reply or correct this record.

compiled by the Cognesio LLP editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-07v0.1.1coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub