Is circumstantial evidence enough to convict in the UK?

If you believe that you may be under investigation for a crime, or if you’ve already been charged with an offence, you’ll likely be wondering how the police or CPS will prove that it was you who committed the offence in question. Ultimately, this will come down to how the prosecution uses various forms of evidence, in order to convince the judge and jury that you’re guilty.

There are a range of different kinds of evidence that can be used in courts of law, and it’s important that you understand the differences between them. Here, we take a closer look at circumstantial evidence, and how it can be used to contribute towards a conviction in the UK.

It’s crucial that you only treat this article as a source of preliminary information. You’ll need the assistance of a qualified criminal defence solicitor to help you fight your case, no matter the kinds of evidence that are being used against you. 

What is circumstantial evidence?

Circumstantial evidence is generally considered to be evidence or information that isn’t directly related to an observation of the crime or event in question. 

An example of circumstantial evidence

A common form of circumstantial evidence is an alibi. In this case, the evidence is used to prove that the person was at another location to the crime in question, thereby indirectly proving that it could not have been them.

What is direct evidence?

The other main kind of evidence is direct evidence. Unlike circumstantial evidence, direct evidence will generally be direct proof of a fact in question. This could be an eyewitness testimony, or video footage of the event taking place.

An example of direct evidence

An example of direct evidence would be eyewitness testimony provided by someone who witnessed the crime taking place. Here, what will be at stake will often be whether or not the court should trust the eyewitness fully. This could consist of doubting their senses or doubting their motivations. 

What kinds of evidence are admissible in the UK?

In short, according to the rules governing evidence in this country, some kinds of circumstantial evidence will be admissible in the UK, but not all. As a result of this nuance, it’s helpful to go into the topic in a little more detail, to allow us to develop a deeper understanding of whether or not a specific item of evidence will be admissible in your case or not.

Probative

No matter what kind of evidence we’re talking about, one of the main criteria that will decide whether it’s admissible or not is its probative value. Essentially, this refers to whether or not the piece of evidence is able to prove something, and as a result, whether it will be helpful for a judge or jury to come to a decision.

Relevant

Evidence must also be relevant to the fact in question. When it comes to circumstantial evidence, this factor will be extra applicable. While it won’t be related to the offence through direct observation, it must be relevant in some other way.

Non-prejudicial

For evidence to be admissible, it must also be non-prejudicial. This means that if the evidence or individual in question is unfairly biased against the defendant, it’s possible that the evidence can’t be used.

Provable

In most cases, the evidence must be clearly provable. While assumptions are permitted, this will be dependent on the nuances of the case in question.

Coherence

Lastly, the evidence must be presentable to the court in a way that makes sense – in other words, it must be logically coherent. This means that it will need to be sufficiently detailed, and provided in chronological order.

All of these factors will need to be taken into consideration when assessing the admissibility of any kind of evidence, whether that’s direct or circumstantial. An experienced criminal defence solicitor will be able to provide you with further advice on specific pieces of evidence, and how you might defend against them.

Unfairly obtained evidence

The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 provides further rules governing whether a piece of evidence is admissible or not. This includes cases where the police question you in a way that breaches your rights, or cases where a confession has been obtained as a result of oppressive treatment. 

It’s critical that your solicitor has sufficient knowledge of the Act, especially of Sections 76 and 78. If there are pieces of evidence that are inadmissible under either of these sections, your solicitor will be able to ask that the court exclude the evidence in question.

Using multiple forms of evidence

It’s very rare that either a prosecution argument or an defence will depend solely on a single piece of evidence. Usually, the goal will be to employ a range of direct and circumstantial evidence in order to paint a clear picture surrounding the offence in question.

This is especially important for the prosecution, as a result of the burden of proof in our criminal justice system. They will need to be able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was the one who committed the crime, meaning that any doubt that the defence can instil in the judge or jury could result in the defendant being found innocent.

Seeking legal assistance

No matter what kinds of evidence you believe might be used against you, if you’re currently a suspect in a crime, it’s critical that you seek legal advice at the earliest opportunity available. 

Your criminal defence solicitor will be able to apply their legal expertise to the evidence in question, and help you to navigate the case more generally. They’ll be able to:

• Advise you both before and during any interviews under caution you need to attend
• Help you to develop a legal defence, arranging for your representation in court if necessary
• Ensure that the law is applied to your case in a just and fair manner at all times
• Help you through the appeals process, if required.

With these kinds of matters, time really is of the essence. It’s crucial that you seek assistance as soon as reasonably possible, so that your legal team can get to work.