How does direct evidence differ from circumstantial evidence?

Direct evidence is significant because it provides straightforward proof that directly links a defendant to the crime in question without needing any additional inference. This type of evidence includes eyewitness accounts, video recordings, or physical evidence (like a weapon with the defendant's fingerprints) that can establish facts of the case explicitly.

In contrast, circumstantial evidence requires the jury or judge to make inferences based on the evidence presented. For example, if a person is seen running away from a crime scene, it does not directly prove they committed the crime, but it may suggest their involvement when considered alongside other evidence.

Understanding the distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence is pivotal in criminal proceedings since direct evidence often carries more weight in establishing guilt or innocence due to its clear connection to the crime.