2 ms·
It's circumstantial evidence at best though, cops need more than just search history to convict.
by glitchc 3y ago
It's circumstantial evidence at best though, cops need more than just search history to convict.
- rolph 3y agoi believe there must be indication of intent. for example a search for -lethal chainsaw injury; followed by purchase of chainsaw and safety gear, is different than purchase of chainsaw, tarps, 5gal bleach, and a pack of smokes
- tzs 3y agoThere's a popular belief that circumstantial evidence is inherently inferior to direct evidence, but that's not actually the case. Direct evidence is evidence that directly links a person to a crime, such as testimony from someone who witnessed the defendant committing the crime or a video showing the defendant committing the crime. Anything else is circumstantial evidence. Fingerprints? Circumstantial. DNA match? Circumstantial. Most criminal convictions are based entirely on circumstantial evidence.