Which of the following would best describe secondary evidence?

The correct answer is C. A copy of a piece of evidence. Secondary evidence is best described as a copy of a piece of evidence. In legal terms, the best (primary) evidence is the original document or item. When the original is unavailable, a copy - such as a photocopy, duplicate, or printed version - may be introduced as secondary evid

Submitted by alyssa_d· Apr 18, 2026Incident Response and Recovery

Question

Options

AOral testimony by a non-expert witness
BOral testimony by an expert witness
CA copy of a piece of evidence
DEvidence that proves a specific act

How the community answered

(56 responses)

A
9% (5)
B
2% (1)
C
86% (48)
D
4% (2)

Explanation

Secondary evidence is best described as a copy of a piece of evidence. In legal terms, the best (primary) evidence is the original document or item. When the original is unavailable, a copy - such as a photocopy, duplicate, or printed version - may be introduced as secondary evidence, typically with an explanation of why the original cannot be produced. Oral testimony by a non-expert witness is direct/testimonial evidence; by an expert witness it is expert testimony; and evidence that proves a specific act is direct evidence. None of those describe the secondary evidence concept.

Topics

#Evidence types#Secondary evidence#Best evidence rule#Digital forensics

Community Discussion

No community discussion yet for this question.

Full SSCP Practice