Which of the following situations represents circumstantial evidence?

Circumstantial evidence refers to evidence that does not directly prove a fact but instead allows for a conclusion to be drawn based on the circumstances surrounding an event. In this case, when a suspect is seen fleeing after an incident, it provides a basis to infer that the individual may have been involved in the event, though it does not directly confirm their guilt.

The act of fleeing can suggest consciousness of guilt; however, it requires additional context and corroborating evidence to establish a definitive connection to the crime. This distinction is crucial in understanding the nature of circumstantial evidence, as it relies on the interpretation of behavior rather than on a direct observation linking an individual to the crime.

Other options represent different types of evidence. Observing smoke indicates a potential fire but does not suggest involvement or responsibility. A matching tool establishes a direct relationship between the suspect’s possessions and the crime scene, categorizing it as direct evidence. Similarly, surveillance footage captures a person entering the building, which can directly relate to the suspect's actions associated with the incident, thereby also serving as direct evidence. Understanding the nuances of each type of evidence is essential for effectively evaluating situations in fire and emergency services.