Want this question answered?
the difference is that Primary evidence is took from that moment and secondary is a piece of evidence found from the past.
Yes, a photograph of a riot can be considered a primary source as it provides direct visual evidence of the event. It captures the scene as it unfolded and can serve as an authentic record of the riot.
To provide an aspect of spacial relativity to a piece or pieces of evidence. This allows for a more accurate recreation of a crime scene at trial
yes it is a primary source
1 The difference between best and secondary evidence is best evidence is the legal doctrine that an original piece of evidence, particularly a document and secondary evidence is Secondary evidence is evidence that has been reproduced from an original document or substituted for an original item. For example, a photocopy of a document or photograph would be considered secondary evidence.
It is a primary source because it was taken at the time.
A primary source might be a letter, photograph, or speech that
It is a primary source because it was taken at the time.
Usually refers to a primary source such as a journal, photograph, letter, etc.
A source directly from an event. An autobiography, Photograph, interview YOU did, are all primary sources.
Photograph the counter and then get crime scene specialists to photograph the rest! If you have blood spatter behind your counter, maybe photography is not your primary issue.
A photograph can be used to keep a special memory, remember a happy occasion (birthday, graduation, wedding) or it can be used as evidence in a crime.