**Standard Criminal Instructions**

Number range CHAPTERLadies and gentlemen of the jury, I am going to give
you final instructions now, since you will soon leave the courtroom to
begin your deliberation. I also will send a written copy of these
instructions with you.

As I told you earlier, the Government has accused the defendant of
committing certain crimes. This is only a charge. In order for you to
find a defendant guilty, you must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt
that a defendant committed the crime as charged. If you are not
convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant committed the crime
as charged, you must find the defendant not guilty of that crime.

During the course of the trial, you received all the evidence you may
properly consider to decide the case. Your decision in the case must be
made solely on the evidence presented at the trial. You should consider
all the evidence that was presented to you.

Do not allow sympathy or prejudice to influence you. The law demands of
you a just verdict, unaffected by anything except the evidence, your
common sense, and the law as I give it to you.

At times during the trial you saw lawyers make objections to questions
or to answers by witnesses. This simply means that the lawyers were
requesting that I make a decision on a particular rule of law. Do not
draw any conclusion from such objections, or from my rulings on the
objections. These are only related to the legal questions I had to
determine, and should not influence your thinking. When I sustained an
objection to a question the witness was not allowed to answer it. Do not
attempt to guess what answer might have been given had I allowed the
question to be answered. Similarly, when I told you not to consider a
particular statement, you were told to put that statement out of your
mind, and you may not refer to that statement in your deliberations.

Neither in these instructions nor in any ruling, action or remark I have
made during the course of this trial have I intended to give any opinion
or suggestion as to what your verdict should be. During this trial, I
have occasionally asked questions of witnesses in order to bring out
facts not then fully covered in testimony. Do not assume that I hold any
opinion on the matter to which my questions are related.

Number range CHAPTERIt is my job to decide what rules of law apply to
this case. I've explained some of these rules to you during the course
of the trial, and I will explain others of them to you before you go to
the jury room. While the lawyers may have properly commented during the
trial on some of these rules, you are to be guided only by what I say
about them. You must follow all the rules as I explain them to you. You
may not follow some and ignore others. Even if you disagree or don't
understand the reasons for some of the rules, you are bound to follow
them.

Number range CHAPTERIf you decide that the Government has proven beyond
a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty, it also will be my job
to decide what the punishment will be. You should not try to guess what
the punishment might be. It should not enter your consideration or
discussions at any time.

Number range CHAPTER The decision you reach in the jury room, whether
guilty or not guilty, must be unanimous. You will all agree. Your
deliberations will be secret. You will never have to explain your
verdict to anyone.

Number range CHAPTERThe law presumes a defendant to be innocent of a
crime. Thus, a defendant, although accused, begins the trial with a
clean slate. That is to say with no evidence against a defendant, and
the law permits nothing but legal evidence presented before the jury to
be considered in support of any charge against a defendant. So, the
presumption of innocence alone is sufficient to acquit a defendant
unless the jurors are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt of the
defendant's guilt from all the evidence in the case. This presumption of
innocence is an abiding presumption that goes with the defendant
throughout the entire case and applies at every stage. As I have said
many times, the Government has the burden of proving a defendant's guilt
beyond a reasonable doubt. Some of you may have served as jurors in
civil cases where you were told that it was only necessary to prove that
a fact is more likely true than not. In criminal cases the Government's
proof must be more powerful than that; it must be beyond a reasonable
doubt.

Number range CHAPTER There are two types of evidence which are generally
presented during a trial\--direct evidence and circumstantial evidence.
Direct evidence is the testimony of a person who asserts of claims to
have actual knowledge of a fact, such as an eyewitness. Circumstantial
evidence is proof of a chain of facts and circumstances indicating the
existence of a fact. The law makes no distinction between the weight or
value to be given to either direct or circumstantial evidence. Nor is a
greater degree of certainty required of circumstantial evidence than of
direct evidence.

While you should consider only the evidence in the case, you are
permitted to draw such reasonable inferences from the testimony and
exhibits as you feel are justified in the light of common experience. In
other words, you may make deductions and reach conclusions which reason
and common sense lead you to draw from the facts which have been
established by the evidence in the case.

Number range CHAPTERAn important part of your job will be making
judgments about the testimony of the witnesses who testified in this
case. You should decide whether you believe what each person had to say,
and how important that testimony was. In making that decision I suggest
that you ask yourself a few questions. Did the person impress you as
honest? Did he or she have any particular reason not to tell the truth?
Did he or she have a personal interest in the outcome of the case? Did
the witness seem to have a good memory? Did the witness have the
opportunity and ability to observe accurately the things he or she
testified about? Did he or she appear to understand the questions
clearly and answer them directly? Did the witnesses' testimony differ
from the testimony of other witnesses? These are a few of the
considerations that will help you determine the accuracy of what each
witness said. The testimony of a witness may be discredited, or as we
sometimes say impeached by showing that he or she previously made
statements which are different than or inconsistent with his testimony
here in court. The earlier inconsistent or contradictory statements are
admissible only to discredit or impeach the credibility of the witness
and not to establish the truth of these earlier statements made
somewhere other than here during the trial. It is your job to determine
the credibility, if any, to be given the testimony of a witness who has
made prior inconsistent or contradictory statements. If a person is
shown to have knowingly testified falsely concerning any important or
material matter, you obviously have a right to distrust the testimony of
such individual concerning other matters. You may reject all of the
testimony of that witness, or give it such weight or credibility as you
may think it deserves. Inconsistencies or discrepancies in the testimony
of a witness or between the testimony of different witnesses may or may
not cause you to disbelieve or discredit such testimony. Two or more
persons witnessing an incident or transaction may simply see or hear it
differently. Innocent misrecollection, like failure of recollection, is
not an uncommon experience. In weighing the effect of a discrepancy,
however, always consider whether it pertains to a matter of importance,
or an insignificant detail, and consider whether the discrepancy results
from innocent error or from intentional falsehood.

Number range CHAPTER During the trial items were received into evidence
as exhibits. Any or all of these exhibits will be sent into the jury
room if you request. Examine the exhibits if you think it would help you
in your deliberations.

...

Number range CHAPTERIt is your duty as jurors to talk with one another
and to deliberate in the jury room. You should try to reach an agreement
if you can. Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but only
after consideration of the evidence with the other members of the jury.
While this is going on, do not hesitate to re-examine your own opinions
and change your mind if you are convinced that you were wrong. But do
not give up your honest beliefs solely because the others think
differently, or merely to get the case over with. In a very real way you
are judges, judges of the facts. Your only interest is to determine
whether the Government has proven the defendant guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt.

When you go to the jury room to begin considering the evidence in this
case, you should first select one of the members of the jury to act as
foreperson. This person will help guide your discussions in the jury
room. Once you are there, if you need to communicate with me, the
foreperson will send a written message to me. However, don't ever tell
me how you stand as to your verdict, numerically or otherwise. As I
mentioned several times, the decision you reach must be unanimous, you
must all agree.

Here is a verdict form, which I will send with you to the jury room. I
also will send to the jury room with you a copy of the indictment. And
again, I remind you that the indictment is not evidence of anything. It
is simply a charge. And when you have reached a decision, and the
verdict form is completed, you should have the foreperson sign the
verdict form at the end, put the date on it, and tell the Bailiff you
are ready to return to the courtroom.