can u convict someone for a charge if there is no physical proof only statements?

Question

there is no weapon nor finger print ,the statements are all differrent conflicting with each other and two of the victems dont know who hit them. the defendent was arrested ten days later at home he was nursing from an car accident from the other month he has pa per work of his injury and said he was home watching a boxing match that came on hbo that night of the crime,defendent says he was home with his family and friends , his witnesses have told the judge already he was home hurt from an auto accident and that he could barely walk, so that there is no way he could of went to a nightclub and did this he also stated that he did not have a licence to drive in witch he did not have one ,when the arreste was made the defendent could barely walk to patrol car

Answer 1

Getting charged is not convicted, get a good lawyer- the judge should throw case out if this is true.

Answer 2

This is why we have lawyers and courts. Remember...the police investigate and if they have "reasonable suspicion" then further investigation on their part can lead to "probable cause". once PC is established an arrest is made. Now what the courts do after that is their business. Sometimes a warrant submitted by the police will be denied by a state's attorney's office (prosecutor to some of you folks) because they feel despite the fact that the PC is there, the case will be next to impossible to prosecute.
As a side note...not having a valid license or any license at all has never stopped people from driving a car. That issue would not even be brought up in court because it's moot.
The best advice? Stay out of gin mills that have a propensity for fights.

Answer 3

A lot of times eyewitness testimony is the onllthing that the police have to work with. If there is a fight, witnesses need to tell the police what exactly happened and not what they think happened. If there is any video evidence that would be beneficial. Yes it is possible to have charges pressed against somebody when all you have is eyewitness testimony. It may not stand up in court but that is the chance one takes.

Answer 4

It depends on the number of people saying he did do the crime. One or two people you can possibly tear their story to pieces; three or more is a conviction if a crime has been done. They do not even have to tell the truth! It is called circumstantial evidence.

Answer 5

It is possible to get a conviction without physical evidence; it depends on the quality of the other evidence and the judgement of the judge or jury.

Answer 6

The first hurdle is finding a judge to allow such a case to go to trial. The likelihood of that is rather low. If by some fluke it did go to trial, the defendant must be found guilty. If found guilty, he can appeal, but logically, it should not even go to trial based on heresay.

Answer 7

If you're the police and you want someone convicted for a crime, you can pin anything on anyone. Check out Mumia Abu-Jamal, he's been on death row since 1982 for the murder of a police officer. He is innocent and there is not enough evidence to really have him incarcerated, yet he remains on death row.
go to:

http://www.zmag.org/CrisesCurEvts/Mumia/mumiacrisis.htm
http://www.mumia.org/freedom.now/

Peace be with you

Answer 8

No the person is not guilty.
Every statement as you said is conflicting, not too mention all the defense has to do is proove that the character witness is not trust worthy(by asking about his/her past, or recent problems).
NOT GUILTY

Answer 9

Jails are crowded with people convicted on circumstantial evidence, and other flimsy evidence.

Answer 10

sutch convictions have happened to my certan knowledge..it sometimes depends on who is acused by who and who knows who,