Plenty of people are cooling their heels in prisons, convicted by the weight of circumstantial evidence. Per Wikipedia:
Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact—like a fingerprint at the scene of a crime. By contrast, direct evidence supports the truth of an assertion directly—i.e., without need for any additional evidence or inference.On its own, it is the nature of circumstantial evidence for more than one explanation to still be possible. Inference from one piece of circumstantial evidence may not guarantee accuracy. Circumstantial evidence usually accumulates into a collection, so that the pieces then become corroborating evidence. Together, they may more strongly support one particular inference over another. An explanation involving circumstantial evidence becomes more valid as proof of a fact when the alternative explanations have been ruled out.
Circumstantial evidence allows a trier of fact to deduce a fact exists.[1] In criminal law, the inference is made by the trier of facts in order to support the truth of assertion (of guilt or absence of guilt).
In practice, this is yet another tool for prosecution to apply pressure to the defendant and to extort confession of some guilt from an innocent person. The prosecution can always connect several seemingly unrelated facts into an "obvious" conclusion that Mr. X was the killer. All too often the justice system is not interested in finding the real killer - it is instead interested in solving the crime quickly, getting the conviction, and moving on. It all depends on morality of people who are doing the job. People like Mike Nifong and Angela Corey do not leave much hope to the accused. Juries are carefully selected among the most malleable people; judges can favor one side against the another - all this was seen aplenty in last years.
“Juries are carefully selected among the most malleable people; judges can favor one side against the another - all this was seen aplenty in last years.”
Right you are! I’ve been challenged off of two juries that involved product liability. As an engineer, the lawyers representing the “defective product” wanted me gone immediately. They were looking for welfare mothers and retired blue collar types.
The major questions during voir dire were about awarding money for “pain and suffering.”
But as regards the microstamped shell casings a defense attorney has plenty of room to rule them out as well. I can’t imagine anyone not polishing off the firing pin on his semi on general principles the day he received the weapon.