For the past couple of weeks we’ve examined different types of evidence. We’ve contrasted hearsay and circumstantial evidence and physical and circumstantial evidence. Now, it’s important we take a step back. All sorts of categories exist for understanding evidence. But we need to look at the two broadest ways of categorizing evidence. This includes understanding the differences between direct and indirect evidence. So, today we’ll look at this, as well as explain how it might relate to your case.

Differences Between Direct and Indirect Evidence

First, let me explain what I mean by “categories.” For example, if we’re talking about living creatures, there is the animal kingdom and the plant kingdom. Within the animal kingdom, there are various classes. One of these classes is mammals. There are various types of mammals, and we categorize them by their family, genus, and species.

We categorize evidence in a similar way. We have given very specific types of evidence in previous blog posts. But now we’re stepping back from specifics and looking at evidence more broadly. Thus, evidence is divided into two main broad categories: direct and indirect.

• Direct evidence: clearly demonstrates the defendant committed the crime.
• Indirect evidence: implies the defendant committed the crime.

With these definitions in mind, both direct and indirect evidence can include eye-witness testimony and physical evidence as subcategories. The difference lies in the relationship between the evidence, the defendant, and the crime.

So, for example, let’s say a 5′ 10″ blonde-haired man named John Doe faces theft charges. If an eye-witness says, “I saw a 5′ 10″ blonde-haired man steal the diamonds,” then we consider this indirect evidence. However, if they say, “I saw John Doe steal the diamonds,” then we consider this direct evidence. The first merely suggests John Doe committed the crime; the second explicitly demonstrates guilt.

Keep in mind, therefore, that “circumstantial evidence” is a type of indirect evidence. Sometimes people use the terms interchangeably. But circumstantial evidence cannot be direct evidence.

Differences Between Direct and Indirect Evidence Applied

Second, how does the distinction between these two relate to your case? You might think, ‘If I have any direct evidence against me, I’ll be guilty.’ But that’s not entirely the case. A good defense attorney will cast doubt on the evidence. So, how certain is the witness that they saw John Doe steal the diamonds, and not just any 5′ 10″ blonde-haired man?

On the contrary, you might think, ‘If I only have indirect evidence against me, I won’t be guilty.’ But that’s not entirely true either. One or two pieces of indirect evidence might not get you convicted, but lots and lots of indirect evidence can. Even if the prosecution does not have any direct evidence. Either way, you will need a quality defense attorney by your side.

Mark Catanzaro Is Your Attorney!

Finally, where can you turn for the best defense attorney? Who can utilize the differences between direct and indirect evidence? Mark Catanzaro, of course! He’s the best attorney in New Jersey! So reach out to him today.