§ 1-4 General Instructions - Direct and Circumstantial Evidence
Two kinds of evidence are recognized by the law: direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. These two kinds of evidence apply to the parties alike, the plaintiff and the defendant, and both are equally good in the law if they meet the test of the law. On a particular factual point, there may be direct evidence, circumstantial evidence or a combination of these kinds of evidence.
Facts in issue may be proved either by direct evidence or by indirect evidence, otherwise called circumstantial evidence. It is direct evidence if it proves a fact without an inference and which in itself, if true, conclusively establishes that fact. By direct evidence of a fact is meant the statements of persons who have perceived its existence by means of their senses, or the production of the thing itself before the court. "Direct evidence" is the testimony of a person who claims to have actual knowledge of a fact. It is evidence based on actual knowledge and proves a fact without inference or presumption. It is when a witness can be called to testify to the precise fact that is the subject of the issue on trial. Direct evidence immediately establishes the main fact to be proved. It is essentially evidence you could see, observe, or hear with your senses.
"Circumstantial evidence" does not tend to immediately prove a fact in issue; however, it does give rise to a legal inference that such a fact does exist. It means the proof of a chain of facts and circumstances indicating the existence of a fact. It is circumstantial evidence if it proves a fact from which an inference of the existence of another fact may be drawn. In other words, you may infer that a particular event occurred based on proof of circumstances warranting such an inference. Circumstantial evidence immediately...
