Oh, Greg F., while you're compiling your references to circumstantial evidence, you also might tell us what you mean by "50% of the time isn't."

Are you saying that 50% of the time circumstantial evidence isn't circumstantial evidence? Are you saying that 50% of the time circumstantial evidence is actually direct evidence? Are you saying that 50% of the time circumstantial evidence is actually no evidence at all? Is it possible that circumstantial evidence can be so overwhelming, as to overcome substantial and convincing doubt as to guilt?

You might want to start, if you haven't already, with mayomick's post of earlier this morning. However, I do recall from many of your posts over the years that you are not a fan of wikipedia. Well, ya gotta start somewhere.