To: WhyisaTexasgirlinPA
I think that started in the OJ trial when the defense kept saying all the evidence was ‘circumstantial’ in a way that made it sound like they were saying “full of $h!t”
Circumstantial has come to mean ‘unsubstantial’ in many people's minds, and that is a bad thing.
MOST evidence in EVERY case is circumstantial. People rarely commit crimes in full daylight in front of witnesses.
173 posted on
07/05/2011 10:04:09 AM PDT by
Mr. K
(CAPSLOCK! -Unleash the fury! [Palin/Bachman 2012- unbeatable ticket])
To: Mr. K
Yes, while reading what constituted circumstantial evidence an example was this: direct evidence is seeing someone shoot another person; circumstantial would be watching them follow that person into a house, carrying a gun and hear the shot fired.
Knowing now how often folks lie under oath, I think the circumstantial evidence holds more weight.
177 posted on
07/05/2011 10:12:07 AM PDT by
WhyisaTexasgirlinPA
(Going into Rehab means never having to say you are sorry....)
To: Mr. K
True! Although, if you’ve ever watched the Law & Order UK version, they solve EVERY case with video! lol They must have a camera on every single street from every angle!
190 posted on
07/05/2011 10:25:20 AM PDT by
WhyisaTexasgirlinPA
(Going into Rehab means never having to say you are sorry....)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson