Essay On Circumstantial Evidence

Physical evidence has a significant foundation in law enforcement and the judicial system. It is necessary for physical and circumstantial evidence to ensure the most accurate outcome of a trial. In some cases, the evidence is not as exact or direct. It appeared to me in the readings the authors were trying to show were all evidence must be exact or not be included in the trial. If this is the case, we would not need a court system. In the readings it appeared to me the authors were trying to say the evidence should meet a definitive threshold before being entered into court (Saks and Koehler, 2005. pp. 892-895). This is not how the judicial system works in the United States. Almost all evidence is circumstantial, which means it can be interpreted. There can always be improvements, but the judicial system is set on variables. There is almost no black and white issues. The judicial system is made to account for these variables of exactness to determine the evidence’s relevance to the trial.

This is the basic difference between a “Bench” trial and a “Jury” trial. The …show more content…
He is an expert in the judicial system and should have an expert eye on what the evidence suggests. In a bench trial there is much less of an emotional aspect. The judge has been in the judicial system for quite some time and has expert experience in the interpretation of the evidence. If the evidence is weak or the application of procedures comes into question with the evidence, a bench trial may be the better option for a defendant. The judge will review the evidence on its merits. If the evidence meets the judge’s threshold and the elements of the offense then the defendant is found guilty. If not, the defendant is acquitted. If a defendant believes his trial is best served with a technical review then he should choose a bench