P2 Q2
200 word response 1 reference/intext citation
Due 1/17/2025
Ronae
Circumstantial physical evidence can provide more information that direct evidence could be missing making it preferred or more reliable than direct evidence. In certain scenarios where direct evidence is unavailable, circumstantial physical evidence can help the investigation by establishing a timeline. Direct evidence independently establishes or disproves facts, while circumstantial evidence supports them through inference. Most forensic crime scene evidence is circumstantial (Vecchi, 2004). A case that involves information from a witness can be unreliable making circumstantial evidence a better option as witnesses can provide inaccurate information due to poor visibility or lack of memory of the events that took place. A case involving a robbery of a family home committed by two male suspects has eyewitness and circumstantial evidence connecting them to the crime. The robbery took place on a rainy night in a small neighborhood, a neighbor that lives across the street three houses down told the investigators they saw the two suspects break into the home using the front door. This neighbor informed the investigators they were unable to describe the features or clothing of the individuals as it was raining and dark but believed it was the same individuals that were caught by the officers. Investigators were able to obtain wet footprints from the home that matched one of the suspect’s sizes and markings of the shoe they were wearing and a glove was found in one of the bedrooms that matched the same brand of gloves found in one of the suspect’s backpack. In this case, the circumstantial evidence would play a pivotal role in establishing strong evidence rather than the testimony from the eyewitness as the witness was unable to identify the suspects because of the poor visibility due to the rain and time of day the robbery took place.
