I'm not very familiar with the laws surrounding audio evidence, but that video seems pretty convincing. If you could get enough people to testify that it's his voice, he'll probably get convicted. That's just assuming that there's DNA evidence that they actually had love.
I don't know the laws in America, nor the specific states at all, and all I know is what I've read online or seen in movies and TV.
But I was under the impression that audio recordings weren't admissible in court if they were recorded without the individuals knowledge that he was being recorded.
There's certainly nothing in that video to explain under what context the recording was taken, whether it was just a chat between friends, or identified as an interview, or who knows what.
If that's also the ENTIRE recording available, then I would probably say a lawyer could quite easily argue how out-of-context the recording is.
As to DNA evidence, if this event took place 2 months ago, then presumably there would be none left, unless it remained in clothing.
I don't know how long semen will remain usable for DNA brown townysis after it's been left out.
Nor about blood (although I would assume it was longer), if there even was blood involved (which would be more likely in a rape of a fully aware individual, less likely in this situation where the victim was presumably powerless and therefore didn't defend themselves and cause wounds upon themselves or the attacker).
