What is the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence?

The difference between direct and circumstantial evidence is important to understand in the criminal justice system of Maryland. Direct evidence is evidence that directly proves a fact in a criminal case such as a confession or an eyewitness testimony. This type of evidence is considered the strongest type of evidence as it proves something without the need for additional evidence. Circumstantial evidence is evidence that suggests the truth of a fact but doesn’t directly prove it, such as a piece of evidence that links a person to the crime. Circumstantial evidence is weaker than direct evidence as it requires an inference or conclusion based on the evidence. An example of circumstantial evidence would be a surveillance video of a person buying a weapon before a crime was committed. In Maryland, both direct and circumstantial evidence are accepted in court cases, with direct evidence being given more weight. However, circumstantial evidence can be used to support a case and is given enough weight to convict someone in criminal proceedings.

Related FAQs

What are the rules of self-incrimination in criminal cases?
What is the purpose of a criminal trial?
What is the purpose of criminal discovery?
What is the impact of Miranda v. Arizona on criminal procedure?
What are the rules of evidence-gathering at a criminal trial?
What are the elements of a crime?
What is the purpose of a criminal defense lawyer?
What are the rules of evidence to be presented in criminal cases?
What is a plea bargain in criminal cases?
What is the difference between felony and misdemeanor sentencing?

What is the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts