Circumstantial evidence does not carry the same weight as direct evidence, especially when there is no direct evidence. For example: you may commit a crime within a building. I may see you walking down the street afterwards and bear witness to that. If there is no evidence that you were actually in the building and no further evidence exists - a conviction would be highly unlikely and almost certainly appealed successfully as unsafe. Circumstantial evidence is mainly used to back up direct evidence.
Juries are more likely to take account of circumstantial evidence than judges are - which is why such convictions are often dismissed at appeal. Juries decide most criminal cases, judges rule on appeals.
Recommended Posts