Direct evidence
Template:Short description Script error: No such module "Distinguish". Template:DMCA Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Sidebar/configuration' not found.
In law, a body of facts that directly supports the truth of an assertion without intervening inference. It is often exemplified by eyewitness testimony,[1][2] which consists of a witness's description of their reputed direct sensory experience of an alleged act without the presentation of additional facts.[3][1] By contrast, circumstantial evidence can help prove via inference whether an assertion is true,[4] such as forensics presented by an expert witness.
In a criminal case, an eyewitness provides direct evidence of the actus reus if they testify that they witnessed the actual performance of the criminal event under question. Other testimony, such as the witness description of a chase leading up to an act of violence or a so-called smoking gun is considered circumstantial.[5]
See also
- Template:Annotated link
- Template:Annotated link
- Hearsay – Usually inadmissible description of out-of-court statements
- In flagrante delicto – The catching of a criminal "red-handed"
References
Page Template:Reflist/styles.css has no content.
- ^ a b Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content."direct evidence". Legal Information Institute. February 2022. Retrieved 2 May 2023 – via Cornell Law School.
- ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Law, Jonathan; Martin, Elizabeth A. (2014) [2009]. "Direct evidence". A Dictionary of Law. Oxford University Press.
- ^ State v. Famber, 214 S.W.2d 40 (Mo. 1947).
- ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Lehman, Jeffrey; Phelps, Shirelle (2005). West's Encyclopedia of American Law, Vol. 2 (2 ed.). Detroit: Thomson/Gale. p. 382. ISBN 9780787663742.
- ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Walton, Douglas (2010). Legal Argumentation and Evidence. Penn State Press. p. 78. ISBN 978-0271048338.
