What is the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence?

Direct evidence is evidence that directly proves that something is true. It is first-hand testimony or physical evidence that can be used to prove that something happened or is true. For example, if a witness sees someone commit a crime, the witness’s testimony is direct evidence that the crime was committed. Circumstantial evidence is evidence that indirectly proves something is true. It is indirect evidence that does not directly prove a fact, but allows someone to infer the fact from other evidence. Circumstantial evidence can be used to create a chain of events that imply that something is true. For example, if a gun is found next to a dead body with a matching bullet in it, someone could infer that the gun was used to kill the person. In Hawaii, both direct and circumstantial evidence can be used in court. Most criminal cases require both kinds of evidence. Direct evidence is usually considered more powerful in court, as it provides direct proof of a fact, while circumstantial evidence is often viewed more skeptically. Nonetheless, circumstantial evidence can often be used to corroborate other evidence and help strengthen a case.

Related FAQs

What is hearsay evidence?
What is a jury trial?
How do I cross-examine a witness?
What are the rights of a defendant?
How does a judge issue a ruling?
How do I file a lawsuit?
What is an appeal?
What is a legal brief?
What is the difference between indictment and arraignment?
What is a subpoena?

What is the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts