What is the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence?

The difference between direct and circumstantial evidence relates to how close the evidence is to the actual facts of the case. Direct evidence is evidence that directly proves the facts of the case. This type of evidence includes eyewitness testimony, physical evidence, or a confession. Circumstantial evidence is evidence that does not directly prove the facts of the case, but rather implies the facts of the case. Examples of circumstantial evidence include statements made by a suspect, items found that could be connected to the crime, or testimony from an expert on the behavior of the suspect. Because direct evidence is closer to the facts of the case, it is usually preferred in a court of law. However, circumstantial evidence can be just as valid as direct evidence when it is used appropriately. In South Carolina, the rules of evidence allow both direct and circumstantial evidence to be used in court. The judge and jury will then decide which type of evidence has the most value in proving the facts of the case.

Related FAQs

What is the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence?
What is a perjury charge?
What is a process server?
How do I file a lawsuit?
What is a motion to dismiss?
What is a pro se litigant?
What is an expert witness?
How do I prepare a witness statement?
What is a restraining order?
What is the difference between a trial lawyer and a defense attorney?

What is the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts