What is the difference between physical evidence and circumstantial evidence? Which do you believe is more reliable to a jury? Discuss why.

Circumstantial evidence refers to evidence that “suggests a fact by implication or inference.” This type of evidence can be obtained by clues from the crime scene or testimony that can link a crime to a person. Physical evidence is evidence that suggests that a crime has been committed.

(Circumstantial) Example: an investigator finds someone lying on the ground with a lot of blood pouring from the head area. The implication is that the person may have died from some type of weapon. (Physical evidence) Example- a person is lying on the ground with blood pouring from their head. There is a gun lying a few inches from their hand. The person probably dies from a gunshot wound. A witness reports a gunshot as well. This type of evidence can be uses to prove that a crime was committed (not an inference).

According to the American Bar Association, circumstantial evidence is used more that physical (or direct) evidence. Both can be used in court. They both have equal impact on a case. (American Bar Association, 2019).

respond to this discussion question in 100 words