Which type of evidence is based on the probability that an event occurred based on surrounding circumstances?

Circumstantial evidence is the correct answer because it refers to evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact. Unlike direct evidence—which directly links a suspect to a crime, such as eyewitness accounts or video footage—circumstantial evidence establishes a context or situation that suggests a particular conclusion. For example, if a person is found at the scene of a crime shortly after it occurred, their presence is circumstantial evidence that they may have been involved.

Circumstantial evidence requires reasoning and the consideration of the surrounding circumstances to establish that an event likely took place. This type of evidence is often crucial in building a case when direct evidence is not available, as it can create a strong narrative through established patterns or connections.

Other types of evidence presented do not fit this definition as accurately. Physical evidence refers primarily to tangible items collected from the crime scene, while witness testimony consists of statements made by individuals who observed events. Both can support a case but do not specifically rely on the probabilistic reasoning that characterizes circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence, on the other hand, provides a straightforward linkage to the crime, which does not depend on probabilities or inferences.