Famous Cases of Circumstantial Evidence: With an Introduction on the Theory of Presumptive Proof

There is no branch of legal knowledge that has a more general usefulness than that which deals with the rules of proof. The first step in every trial is to establish the facts of the case, for whoever is wrong in his proof is wrong in everything. Despite the fact that lawyers believe that the law is always established and determined, nevertheless, according to them, the discovery of this fact can mislead even the most skillful. No work on proof theory has yet been published in English, and the nature of circumstantial evidence has been studied even less. The purpose of this paper is to explore some of the more general principles of legal proof and, in particular, those types of proof those are based on presumptions and are known to the English lawyer as circumstantial evidence. Proof and evidence are often confused because they imply the same idea; but they differ as cause and effect. Evidence is the legal credibility that the law gives to any evidence or written statement; proof is the legal process by which that proof is created. Consequently, the law does not admit any evidence other than that which is consistent with its own principles.