Which type of evidence can suggest the guilt of a suspect without providing conclusive proof?

The type of evidence that can suggest the guilt of a suspect without providing conclusive proof is known as indirect evidence. This type of evidence relies on inference rather than direct observation. For example, if a suspect is found near the scene of a crime and has a motive, this circumstantial evidence can imply culpability without definitively proving it. Indirect evidence is often used to build a case and can strengthen the overall argument against a suspect, but it does not directly establish that the suspect committed the act.

In contrast, physical evidence refers to tangible objects that can be collected and scientifically analyzed, such as fingerprints or DNA, which can provide direct links to a suspect. Direct evidence involves firsthand accounts or observations, such as eyewitness testimony, that can directly implicate a suspect. Demonstration evidence is used to illustrate or explain concepts in court but does not inherently imply guilt. Therefore, indirect evidence is the most accurate choice for suggesting a suspect's guilt without reaching a definitive conclusion.