From: Leebo86 | #034
What I meant by the fact that it's a misconception that "circumstantial is by default weaker than direct" is the fact that direct evidence is often very weak. A witness can have a poor memory or think they saw something they didn't actually see.
A circumstance can't change. The fact that Casey was seen calmly renting a movie hours after her daughter died (whether by murder, accident, or whatever, it doesn't really matter) is irrefutable. It doesn't prove murder, but it's not going to waver.
Well, yeah I can see what you mean. I am saying that circumstantial evidence is always weak though. It doesn't have to be weaker than default, but its always weak and therefore is a known weakness. While direct has a possibility of being weak but can in fact be very, very strong.
Also who rents a movie after committing murder how odd.
--
Sir Chris
http://img.imgcake.com/Chris2pngas.png