**IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT**

**FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE**

**WESTERN DIVISION**

> UNITED STATES OF AMERICA\
> Plaintiff,

 vs.                                                                              
CRIMINAL NO.  

Defendant.

**JURY INSTRUCTIONS**

1.01

(1)   Members of the jury, now it is time for me to instruct you about
the law that you must follow in deciding this case.

(2)   Please listen very carefully to everything I say.

 

1.02

(1)   You have two main duties as jurors. The first one is to decide
what the facts are from the evidence that you saw and heard here in
court. Deciding what the facts are is your job, not mine, and nothing
that I have said or done during this trial was meant to influence your
decision about the facts in any way.

(2)   Your second duty is to take the law that I give apply it to the
facts, and decide if the government has proved the defendant guilty
beyond a reasonable doubt. It is my job to instruct you about the law,
and you are bound by the oath that you took at the beginning of the
trial to follow the instructions that I give you, even if you personally
disagree with them.

(3)   The lawyers have talked about the law during their arguments. But
if what they said is different from what I say, must follow what I say.
What I say about the law controls.

(4)   Perform these duties fairly. Do not let any bias, sympathy or
prejudice that you may feel toward one side or other influence your
decision in any way.

 

1.03

(1)   As you know, the defendant has pleaded not guilty to the crime
charged in the indictment. The indictment is not any evidence at all of
guilt. It is just the formal way that the government tells the defendant
what crime he is accused of committing. It does not even raise any
suspicion of guilt.

(2)   Instead, the defendant starts the trial with a clean slate, with
no evidence at all against him, and the law presumes that he is
innocent. This presumption of innocence stays with him unless the
government presents evidence here in court that overcomes the
presumption, and convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt that he is
guilty.

(3)   This means that the defendant has no obligation to present any
evidence at all, or to prove to you in any way that he is innocent. It
is up to the government to prove that he is guilty, and this burden
stays on the government from start to finish. You must find the
defendant not guilty unless the government convinces you beyond a
reasonable doubt that he is guilty.

(4)   The government must prove every element of the crime charged
beyond a reasonable doubt. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean
proof beyond all possible doubt. Possible doubts or doubts based purely
on speculation are not reasonable doubts. A reasonable doubt is a doubt
based on reason and common sense. It may arise from the evidence, the
lack of evidence, or the nature of the evidence.

(5)   Proof beyond a reasonable doubt means proof which is so convincing
that you would not hesitate to rely and act on it in making the most
important decisions in your own lives. If you are convinced that the
government has proved the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,
say so by returning a guilty verdict. If you are not convinced, say so
by returning a not guilty verdict.

 

1.04

(1)   You must make your decision based only on the evidence that you
saw and heard here in court. Do not let rumors, suspicions, or anything
else that you may have seen or heard outside of court influence your
decision in any way.

(2)   The evidence in this case includes only what the witnesses said
while they were testifying under oath; the exhibits that I allowed into
evidence; and any stipulations that the lawyers agreed to.

(3)   Nothing else is evidence. The lawyers\' statements and arguments
are not evidence. Their questions and objections are not evidence. My
legal rulings are not evidence.  And my comments are not evidence.

(4)   Make your decision based only on the evidence, as I have defined
it here, and nothing else.

 

1.05

(1)   You should use your common sense in weighing the evidence.
Consider it in light of your everyday experience with people and events,
and give it whatever weight you believe it deserves.

 

1.06

(1)   Now, some of you may have heard the terms \"direct evidence\" and
\"circumstantial evidence.\"

(2)   Direct evidence is simply evidence like the testimony of an
eyewitness which, if you believe it, directly proves a fact. If a
witness testified that he saw it raining outside, and you believed him,
that would be direct evidence that it was raining.

(3)   Circumstantial evidence is simply a chain of circumstances that
indirectly proves a fact. If someone walked into the courtroom wearing a
raincoat covered with drops of water and carrying a wet umbrella, that
would be circumstantial evidence from which you could conclude that it
was raining.

(4)   It is your job to decide how much weight to give the direct and
circumstantial evidence. The law makes no distinction between the weight
that you should give to either one, or say that one is any better
evidence than the other. You should consider all the evidence, both
direct and circumstantial, and give it whatever weight you believe it
deserves.

 

1.07

\(1\) Another part of your job as jurors is to decide how credible or
believable each witness was. This is your job, not mine. It is up to you
to decide if a witness's testimony was believable, and how much weight
you think it deserves. You are free to believe everything that a witness
said, or only part of it, or none of it at all. But you should act
reasonably and carefully in making these decisions.

\(2\) Let me suggest some things for you to consider in evaluating each
witness's testimony.

\(A\) Ask yourself if the witness was able to clearly see or hear the
events. Sometimes even an honest witness may not have been able to see
or hear what was happening, and may make a mistake.

\(B\) Ask yourself how good the witness's memory seemed to be. Did the
witness seem able to accurately remember what happened?

\(C\) Ask yourself if there was anything else that may have interfered
with the wi1 ability to perceive or remember the events.

\(D\) Ask yourself how the witness acted while testifying. Did the
witness appear honest? Or did the witness appear to be lying?

\(E\) Ask yourself if the witness had any relationship to the government
or the defendant, or anything to gain or lose from the case that might
influence the witness's testimony. Ask yourself if the witness had any
bias, or prejudice, or reason for testifying that might cause the
witness to lie or to slant the testimony in favor of one side or the
other.

\[(F)   Ask yourself if the witness testified inconsistently while on
the witness stand, or if the witness said or did something \[failed to
say or do something\] at any other time that is inconsistent with what
the witness said while testifying. If you believe that the witness was
inconsistent, ask yourself if this makes the witness's testimony less
believable. Sometimes it may; other times it may not. Consider whether
the inconsistency was about something important, or about some
unimportant detail. Ask yourself if it seemed like an innocent mistake,
or if it seemed deliberate.\]

(G)   And ask yourself how believable the witness's testimony was in
light of all the other evidence. Was the witness's testimony supported
or contradicted by other evidence that you found believable? If you
believe that a witness's testimony was contradicted by other evidence,
remember that people sometimes forget thin and that even two honest
people who witness the same event may not describe it exactly the same
way.

(H)   These are only some of the things that you may consider in
deciding how believable each witness was. You may also consider other
things that you think shed some light on the witness's believability.
Use your common sense and your everyday experience in dealing with other
people. And then decide what testimony you believe, and how much weight
you think it deserves.

 

1.08

(1)   One more point about the witnesses. Sometimes jurors wonder if the
number of witnesses who testified makes any difference.

(2)   Do not make any decisions based only on the number of witnesses
who testified. What is more important is how believable the witnesses
were, and how much weight you think their testimony deserves.
Concentrate on that, not the numbers.

 

1.09

(1)   The lawyers for both sides objected to some of the things that
were said or done during the trial. Do not hold that against either side
because the lawyers have a duty to object whenever they think that
something is not permitted by the rules of evidence.

(2)   And do not interpret my rulings on their objections as any
indication of how I think the case should be decided. My rulings were
based on the rules of evidence, not on how I feel about the case.

2.01

(1)   That concludes the part of my instructions explaining your duties
and the general rules that apply in every criminal case. In a moment, I
will explain the elements of the crimes that the defendant is accused of
committing.

(2)   But before I do that, I want to emphasize that the defendant is
only on trial for the particular crime charged in the indictment. Your
job is limited to deciding whether the government has proved the crime
charged.

(3)   Also keep in mind that whether anyone else should be prosecuted
and convicted for this crime is not a proper matter for you to consider.
The possible guilt of others is no defense to a criminal charge. Your
job is to decide if the government has proved this defendant guilty. Do
not let the possible guilt of others influence your decision in any way.

 

3-5

The indictment names defendants who are on trial together. In reaching a
verdict, however, you must bear in mind that guilt is individual. Your
verdict as to this defendant must be determined separately with respect
to him, solely on the evidence, or lack of evidence, presented against
him without regard to the guilt or innocence of anyone else.

In addition, some of the evidence in this case was limited to one
defendant. Let me emphasize that any evidence admitted solely against
one defendant may be considered only as against that defendant and may
not in any respect enter into your deliberations on any other defendant.

 

2.02

(1)   Count \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ of the indictment accuses the
defendant of \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ in
violation of federal law. For you to find the defendant guilty of this
crime, you must be convinced that the government has proved each and
every one of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

(A)   First, that the defendant [(fully define the prohibited acts
and/or results required to convict)]{.underline}.

(B)   Second, that the defendant did so [(fully define the precise
mental state required to convict)]{.underline}.

\[(C)   Third, that [(fully define any other elements required to
convict]{.underline}.\]

\[(2)   Insert applicable definitions of terms used here.\]

(3)   If you are convinced that the government has proved all of these
elements, say so by returning a guilty verdict on this charge. If you
have a reasonable doubt about any one of these elements, then you must
find the defendant no guilty of this charge.

\[(4)   Insert applicable explanations of any matters not required to
convict here.\]

 

2.04

(1)   Next, I want to say a word about the date mentioned in the
indictment.

(2)   The indictment charges that the crime happened \"on or about\"
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.  The
government does not have to prove that the crime happened on that exact
date. But the government must prove that the crime happened reasonably
close to that date.

 

3-11

In addition to the foregoing elements of the offense, you must consider
whether any act in furtherance of the crime occurred within the Western
District of Tennessee.

You are instructed that the Western District of Tennessee encompasses
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, Tennessee.

In this regard, the government need not prove that the crime itself was
committed in this district or that the defendants themselves were
present here.  It is sufficient to satisfy this element if any act in
furtherance of the crime occurred within this district. If you find that
the government has failed to prove that any act in furtherance of the
crime occurred within this district \-- or if you have a reasonable
doubt on this issue \-- then you must acquit.

6.01

(1)   That concludes the part of my instructions explaining the elements
of the crime.  Next I will explain the defendant\'s position.

(2)   The defense says
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.

 

7.02A

(1)   A defendant has an absolute right not to testify \[or present
evidence\].  The fact that he did not testify \[or present any
evidence\] cannot be considered by you in any way.  Do not even discuss
it in your deliberations.

(2)   Remember that it is up to the government to prove the defendant
guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  It is not up to the defendant to
prove that he is innocent.

 

7.02B

(1)   You have heard the defendant testify.  Earlier, I talked to you
about the \"credibility\" or the \"believability\" of the witnesses. 
And I suggested some things for you to consider in evaluating each
witness\'s testimony.

(2)   You should consider those same things in evaluating the
defendant\'s testimony.

 

8.01

(1)   That concludes the part of my instructions explaining the rules
for considering some of the testimony and evidence. Now let me finish up
by explaining some things about your deliberations in the jury room, and
your possible verdicts.

(2)   The first thing that you should do in the jury room is choose
someone to be your foreperson. This person will help to guide your
discussions, and will speak for you here in court.

(3)   Once you start deliberating, do not talk to the jury officer, or
to me, or to anyone else except each other about case. If you have any
questions or messages, you must write them down on a piece of paper,
sign them, and then give them to the jury officer. The officer will give
them to me, and I will respond as soon as I can. I may have to talk to
the lawyers about what you have asked, so it may take me some time to
get back to you. Questions or messages normally should be sent to me
through your foreperson.

 

8.02

(1)   Remember that you must make your decision based only on the
evidence that you saw and heard here in court.  Do not try to gather any
information about the case on your own while you are deliberating.

(2)   For example, do not conduct any experiments inside or outside the
jury room; do not bring any books, like a dictionary, or anything else
with you to help you with your deliberations; do not conduct any
independent research, reading or investigation about the case; and do
not visit any of the places that were mentioned during the trial.

(3)   Make your decision based only on the evidence that you saw and
heard here in court.

 

8.03

(1)   Your verdict, whether it is guilty or not guilty, must be
unanimous.

(2)   To find the defendant guilty, every one of you must agree that the
government has overcome the presumption of innocence with evidence that
proves his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

(3)   To find him not guilty, every one of you must agree that the
government has failed to convince you beyond a reasonable doubt.

(4)   Either way, guilty or not guilty, your verdict must be unanimous.

 

8.04

(1)   Now that all the evidence is in and the arguments are completed,
you are free to talk about the case in the jury room. In fact, it is
your duty to talk with each other about the evidence, and to make every
reasonable effort you can to reach unanimous agreement. Talk with each
other, listen carefully and respectfully to each other's views, and keep
an open mind as you listen to what your fellow jurors have to say. Try
your best to work out your differences. Do not hesitate to change your
mind if you are convinced that other jurors are right and that your
original position was wrong.

(2)   But do not ever change your mind just because other jurors see
things differently, or just to get the case over with. In the end, your
vote must be exactly that------ your own vote. It is important for you
to reach unanimous agreement, but only if you can do so honestly and in
good conscience.

(3)   No one will be allowed to hear your discussions in the jury room,
and no record will be made of what you say. So you should all feel free
to speak your minds.

(4)   Listen carefully to what the other jurors have to say, and then
decide for yourself if the government has proved the defendant guilty
beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

8.05

(1)   If you decide that the government has proved the defendant
guilty, then it will be my job to decide what the appropriate punishment
should be.

(2)   Deciding what the punishment should be is my job, not yours. It
would violate your oaths as jurors to even consider the possible
punishment in deciding your verdict.

(3)   Your job is to look at the evidence and decide if the government
has proved the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

8.06

(1)   I have prepared a verdict form that you should use to record your
verdict.  The form reads as follows: 
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.

(2)   If you decide that the government has proved the charge against
the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt, say so by having your
foreperson mark the appropriate place on the form.  If you decide that
the government has not proved the charge against him beyond a reasonable
doubt, say so by having your foreperson mark the appropriate place on
the form.  Your foreperson should then sign the form, put the date on
it, and return it to me.

8.09

(1)   Let me finish up by repeating something I said to you earlier.
Nothing that I have said or done during this trial was meant to
influence your decision in any way.  You decide for yourselves if the
government has proved the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.