Which type of evidence is subject to the interpretation of the jury?

Circumstantial evidence is subject to the interpretation of the jury because it relies on inference rather than direct observation of a fact. This type of evidence does not directly prove a fact but suggests a conclusion based on the circumstances surrounding an event. For instance, if a person is seen walking away from a crime scene with a weapon, the jury must interpret the significance of this evidence and determine whether it implies guilt or merely coincidence.

Physical evidence, on the other hand, consists of tangible items that can be directly observed or measured, such as fingerprints or DNA. Testimonial evidence involves statements made by witnesses, which can also be straightforward but is usually weighed by credibility and reliability. Class evidence refers to materials that are associated with a particular group but not conclusively tied to a specific source, such as fibers from clothing. While these elements can inform the jury's understanding, circumstantial evidence particularly requires the jury to draw inferences and make judgments based on the context, thus making it the most open to interpretation.