This article provides an overview of expert evidence given by linguists in Australian courts. This linguistic evidence has been primarily in two areas: analysis of police records of interview, and speaker identification on taperecordings. While linguistic evidence in the latter area tends to be uncontested, most courts have ruled that linguistic evidence concerning police records of interview is not legally admissible. Increased attention from the media, the legal profession and linguists themselves appears to be pointing the way to acceptability.