Members of the jury, I will now instruct you on the law that you must follow in

deciding this case. I will also give you a copy of these instructions to use in the jury

room. You must follow all of my instructions about the law, even if you disagree with

them. This includes the instructions I gave you before the trial, any instructions I gave

you during the trial, and the instructions I am giving you now.

As jurors, you have two duties. Your first duty is to decide the facts from the

evidence that you saw and heard here in court. This is your job, not my job or anyone

else’s job.

Your second duty is to take the law as I give it to you, apply it to the facts, and

decide if the government has proved the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

You must perform these duties fairly and impartially. Do not let sympathy,

prejudice, fear, or public opinion influence you. In addition, do not let any person’s

race, color, religion, national ancestry, or gender influence you.

You must not take anything I said or did during the trial as indicating that I

have an opinion about the evidence or about what I think your verdict should be.

1

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 1 of 39 PageID #:731
The charges against the defendant are in a document called an indictment. You

will have a copy of the indictment during your deliberations.

The indictment in this case charges that the defendant committed the crimes of

solicitation of a crime of violence and use of an interstate facility with the intent that

a murder-for-hire be committed. The defendant has pled not guilty to the charges.

The indictment is simply the formal way of telling the defendant what

crimes he is accused of committing. It is not evidence that the defendants is guilty. It

does not even raise a suspicion of guilt.

2

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 2 of 39 PageID #:732
The defendant is presumed innocent of each and every one of the charges. This

presumption continues throughout the case, including during your deliberations. It is

not overcome unless, from all the evidence in the case, you are convinced beyond a

reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty as charged.

The government has the burden of proving the defendant’s guilt beyond a

reasonable doubt. This burden of proof stays with the government throughout the case.

The defendant is never required to prove his innocence. He is not required to

produce any evidence at all.

3

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 3 of 39 PageID #:733
You must make your decision based only on the evidence that you saw and heard

here in court. Do not consider anything you may have seen or heard outside of court,

including anything from the newspaper, television, radio, the Internet, or any other

source.

The evidence includes only what the witnesses said when they were testifying

under oath, the exhibits that I allowed into evidence, and the stipulations that the

lawyers agreed to. A stipulation is an agreement that certain facts are true or that a

witness would have given certain testimony.

Nothing else is evidence. The lawyers’ statements and arguments are not

evidence. If what a lawyer said is different from the evidence as you remember it, the

evidence is what counts. The lawyers’ questions and objections likewise are not

evidence.

A lawyer has a duty to object if he thinks a question is improper. If I sustained

objections to questions the lawyers asked, you must not speculate on what the answers

might have been.

If, during the trial, I struck testimony or exhibits from the record, or told you to

disregard something, you must not consider it.

You will remember that, during the trial, I instructed you that I admitted

certain evidence for a limited purpose. Specifically, you heard Mr. Frank Sodetz testify

about what Mr. Robert Bevis told Mr. Sodetz and about what Mr. Sodetz believed the

conversations between Mr. Bevis and Mr. Dvorkin meant. You must consider this

evidence only for the limited purpose for which it was admitted, specifically, simply to

explain why Mr. Sodetz decided to take the particular next steps in the investigation.

4

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 4 of 39 PageID #:734
Give the evidence whatever weight you decide it deserves. Use your common

sense in weighing the evidence, and consider the evidence in light of your own everyday

experience.

People sometimes look at one fact and conclude from it that another fact exists.

This is called an inference. You are allowed to make reasonable inferences, so long as

they are based on the evidence.

5

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 5 of 39 PageID #:735
You may have heard the terms “direct evidence” and “circumstantial evidence.” 

Direct evidence is evidence that directly proves a fact. Circumstantial evidence is

evidence that indirectly proves a fact.

You are to consider both direct and circumstantial evidence. The law does not

say that one is better than the other. It is up to you to decide how much weight to give

to any evidence, whether direct or circumstantial.

6

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 6 of 39 PageID #:736
Do not make any decisions simply by counting the number of witnesses who

testified about a certain point.

What is important is how truthful and accurate the witnesses were and how

much weight you think their testimony deserves.

7

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 7 of 39 PageID #:737
A defendant has an absolute right not to testify. You may not consider in any

way the fact that the defendant did not testify. You should not even discuss it in your

deliberations.

8

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 8 of 39 PageID #:738
Part of your job as jurors is to decide how believable each witness was, and how

much weight to give each witness’ testimony. You may accept all of what a witness

says, or part of it, or none of it.

Some factors you may consider include:

- the intelligence of the witness;

- the witness’ ability and opportunity to see, hear, or know the things the

witness testified about;

- the witness’ memory;

- the witness’ demeanor;

- whether the witness had any bias, prejudice, or other reason to lie or

slant the testimony;

- the truthfulness and accuracy of the witness’ testimony in light of the

other evidence presented; and

- inconsistent statements or conduct by the witness.

9

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 9 of 39 PageID #:739
It is proper for an attorney to interview any witness in preparation for trial.

10

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 10 of 39 PageID #:740
You have heard evidence that before the trial, witnesses made statements that

may be inconsistent with their testimony here in court. You may consider an

inconsistent statement made before the trial only to help you decide how believable a

witness’ testimony was here in court. If an earlier statement was made under oath,

then you can also consider the earlier statement as evidence of the truth of whatever

the witness said in the earlier statement.

11

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 11 of 39 PageID #:741
You have heard testimony about Robert Bevis’s character for untruthfulness.

You may consider this evidence only in deciding the believability of Robert Bevis’s

testimony and how much weight to give it. 

12

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 12 of 39 PageID #:742
You have heard testimony from Robert Bevis, who was granted immunity for his

trial testimony, meaning that his trial testimony cannot be used against him in any

criminal case. You may give this witness’ testimony whatever weight you believe is

appropriate, keeping in mind that you must consider that testimony with caution and

great care. 

13

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 13 of 39 PageID #:743
You have heard testimony about the defendant’s character for peacefulness. You

should consider this testimony together with and in the same you consider the other

evidence. 

14

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 14 of 39 PageID #:744
You have heard from certain witnesses—namely, Michael Mulcahy, Erin Gabor,

William Truemper, and Alexander Kerr—who gave opinions and testimony about

subjects based on those witnesses’ experience, training, and education. You do not have

to accept these witnesses’ testimony. You should judge these witnesses’ testimony the

same way you judge the testimony of any other witness. In deciding how much weight

to give to the testimony, you should consider the particular witness’ qualifications, how

he reached his conclusions, and the factors I have described for determining the

believability of testimony.

15

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 15 of 39 PageID #:745
You have heard recorded conversations. This is proper evidence that you should

consider together with and in the same way you consider the other evidence.

You were also given transcripts of the conversations to help you follow the

recordings as you listened to them. The recordings are the evidence of what was said

and who said it. The transcripts are not evidence. If you noticed any differences

between what you heard in a conversation and what you read in the transcripts, your

understanding of the recording is what matters. In other words, you must rely on what

you heard, not what you read. And if you could not hear or understand certain parts

of a recording, you must ignore the transcripts as far as those parts are concerned.

I am providing you with the recordings and a device with instructions on its use.

It is up to you to decide whether to listen to the recording during your deliberations.

You may, if you wish, rely on your recollections of what you heard during the trial.

16

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 16 of 39 PageID #:746
A demonstrative exhibit was shown to you to help explain other evidence that

was admitted. Specifically, you were shown Government Exhibit 20, a timeline of

dates. This timeline is not itself evidence or proof of any facts, so you will not have this

timeline during your deliberations.

17

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 17 of 39 PageID #:747
If you have taken notes during the trial, you may use them during deliberations

to help you remember what happened during the trial. You should use your notes only

as aids to your memory. The notes are not evidence. All of you should rely on your

independent recollection of the evidence, and you should not be unduly influenced by

the notes of other jurors. Notes are not entitled to any more weight than the memory

or impressions of each juror.

18

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 18 of 39 PageID #:748
Count One of the indictment charges the defendant with soliciting Robert Bevis

to commit a violent crime, namely, the crime of murder-for-hire. In order for you to

find the defendant guilty of this charge, the government must prove each of the two

following things beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. The defendant solicited, induced, or endeavored to persuade Robert Bevis

to commit a violent crime in violation of federal law; and

2. The defendant acted with the intent that Robert Bevis commit a violent

crime in violation of federal law under circumstances strongly

corroborative of that intent.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that the government has

proved each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt as to the charge you are

considering, then you should find the defendant guilty of that charge.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that

the government has failed to prove any one of these elements beyond a reasonable

doubt as to the charge you are considering, then you should find the defendant not

guilty of that charge.

19

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 19 of 39 PageID #:749
Whether a particular statement is a solicitation, an inducement, or an endeavor

to persuade another person to commit a violent crime is governed by an objective

standard. That is, a statement is a solicitation, an inducement, or an endeavor to

persuade if the statement was made under such circumstances that a reasonable

person hearing or reading the statement and familiar with its context would

understand it as a serious expression of an intent to cause another to commit a violent

crime. It is not necessary for a statement to contain explicitly violent language in order

for the statement to be a solicitation, an inducement, or an endeavor to persuade

another person to commit a violent crime. 

20

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 20 of 39 PageID #:750
It is not a defense that the person solicited could not be convicted of the crime

because he lacked the state of mind required for its commission, or because he is not

subject to prosecution.

21

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 21 of 39 PageID #:751
You are instructed as a matter of law that the crime of murder-for-hire, which

I will define later in detail when I get to Counts Two through Six, is a violent crime in

violation of federal law.

You are further instructed that, although murder-for-hire requires actually

causing interstate travel, or actually using or causing the use of an interstate facility,

a solicitation, an inducement, or an endeavor to persuade does not require actually

causing interstate travel, or actually using or causing the use of an interstate facility.

Instead, for Count One, the defendant need only intend that another person commit

the crime of murder-for-hire. But remember that Count One requires that the

defendant acted with that intent under circumstances strongly corroborative of that

intent. I will now give you some instructions on the definition of strongly corroborative

circumstances. 

22

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 22 of 39 PageID #:752
Before I give you some examples of circumstances that might be strongly

corroborative of intent, you should note that even if you find that the evidence has

proven one of these example-circumstances, more than one of them, or even all of them,

you need not find that the circumstances are strongly corroborative of intent. And by

the same token, even if you find that none of these example-circumstances exist, you

could still find that the circumstances that do exist are strongly corroborative of intent.

Ultimately, it is up to you to decide whether there are strongly corroborating

circumstances of the defendant’s intent, or put another way, whether the

circumstances strongly corroborate that the defendant was serious when he allegedly

solicited the criminal conduct.

Examples of strongly corroborative circumstances could include, but are not

necessarily limited to, the following: 

(1) an offer or promise of payment or some other benefit to the person

solicited if he would commit the offense;

(2) a threat of harm or other damage to the person solicited for refusing to

commit the offense;

(3) repeated solicitation of the commission of the offense, discussion at length

in soliciting the commission of the offense, or making explicit that the

solicitation is serious; 

(4) a belief or awareness that the person solicited had previously committed

similar offenses; and

(5) acquisition of weapons, tools, or information suited for use by the person

solicited in the commission of the offense, or other apparent preparations

for the commission of the offense by the person solicited.

23

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 23 of 39 PageID #:753
Counts Two, Three, Four, Five, and Six of the indictment charge the defendant

with using or causing the use of facilities of interstate commerce with the intent that

a murder for hire be committed. In order for you to find the defendant guilty of this

charge, the government must prove each of the three following elements beyond a

reasonable doubt:

1. The defendant knowingly used or caused another to use a facility of

interstate commerce; and

2. The defendant did so with the intent that a murder be committed in

violation of the laws of any State; and

3. Something of pecuniary value was promised or agreed to be paid in

consideration for the murder. 

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that the government has

proved each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt as to the charge you are

considering, then you should find the defendant guilty of that charge.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that

the government has failed to prove any one of these elements beyond a reasonable

doubt as to the charge you are considering, then you should find the defendant not

guilty of that charge.

24

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 24 of 39 PageID #:754
A person acts “knowingly” if he realizes what he is doing and is aware of the

nature of his conduct, and does not act through ignorance, mistake, or accident. In

deciding whether the defendant acted knowingly, you may consider all of the evidence,

including what the defendant did or said.

25

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 25 of 39 PageID #:755
Something of “pecuniary value” means anything of value in the form of money,

a negotiable instrument, a commercial interest, or anything else the primary

significance of which is economic advantage.

26

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 26 of 39 PageID #:756
A “facility of interstate commerce” includes means of transportation and

communication, such as land-line telephones, cellular telephones, and vehicles. To be

a “facility of interstate commerce,” a means of transportation does not actually have

to have traveled across state lines nor does a means of communication have to have

communicated across state lines.

27

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 27 of 39 PageID #:757
The indictment charges that the offenses happened “on or about” certain dates

or between certain dates. The government must prove that the crimes happened

reasonably close to the dates in the indictment. The government is not required to

prove that the crimes happened on or between the those exact dates.

28

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 28 of 39 PageID #:758
The defendant has been accused of more than one crime. The number of charges

is not evidence of guilt and should not influence your decision.

You must consider each charge and the evidence concerning each charge

separately. Your decision on one charge, whether it is guilty or not guilty, should not

influence your decision on any other charge.

29

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 29 of 39 PageID #:759
In deciding your verdict, you should not consider the possible punishment for the

defendant. If you decide that the government has proved the defendant guilty beyond

a reasonable doubt, then it will be my job to decide on the appropriate punishment.

30

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 30 of 39 PageID #:760
Once you are all in the jury room, the first thing you should do is choose a

foreperson. The foreperson should see to it that your discussions are carried on in an

organized way and that everyone has a fair chance to be heard. You may discuss the

case only when all jurors are present.

Once you start deliberating, do not communicate about the case or your

deliberations with anyone except other members of your jury. You may not

communicate with others about the case or your deliberations by any means. This

includes oral or written communication, as well as any electronic method of

communication, such as telephone, cell phone, smart phone, iPhone, Blackberry,

computer, text messaging, instant messaging, the Internet, chat rooms, blogs, websites,

or services like Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, YouTube, Twitter, or any other method

of communication.

If you need to communicate with me while you are deliberating, send a note

through the court security officer. The note should be signed by the foreperson, or by

one or more members of the jury. To have a complete record of this trial, it is important

that you do not communicate with me except by a written note. I may have to talk to

the lawyers about your message, so it may take me some time to get back to you. You

may continue your deliberations while you wait for my answer.

Please be advised that transcripts of trial testimony are not available to you.

You must rely on your collective memory of the testimony.

If you send me a message, do not include the breakdown of any votes you may

have conducted. In other words, do not tell me that you are split 6–6, or 8–4, or

whatever your vote happens to be.

31

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 31 of 39 PageID #:761
A verdict form has been prepared for you. You will take this form with you to the

jury room.

[Read the verdict form.]

When you have reached unanimous agreement, your foreperson will fill in, date,

and sign the verdict form. Each of you will sign it.

Advise the court security officer once you have reached a verdict. When you come

back to the courtroom, I will read the verdict aloud.

32

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 32 of 39 PageID #:762
The verdict must represent the considered judgment of each juror. Your verdict,

whether it is guilty or not guilty, must be unanimous.

You should make every reasonable effort to reach a verdict. In doing so, you

should consult with each other, express your own views, and listen to your fellow

jurors’ opinions. Discuss your differences with an open mind. Do not hesitate to

re-examine your own view and change your opinion if you come to believe it is wrong.

But you should not surrender your honest beliefs about the weight or effect of evidence

just because of the opinions of your fellow jurors or just so that there can be a

unanimous verdict.

The twelve of you should give fair and equal consideration to all the evidence.

You should deliberate with the goal of reaching an agreement that is consistent with

the individual judgment of each juror.

You are impartial judges of the facts. Your sole interest is to determine whether

the government has proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

33

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 33 of 39 PageID #:763
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

DANIEL DVORKIN

 12 CR 500

 Judge Edmond E. Chang

VERDICT FORM

COUNT ONE

With respect to COUNT ONE of the Indictment, we, the jury, find defendant

DANIEL DVORKIN:

GUILTY __________ NOT GUILTY __________

1

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 34 of 39 PageID #:764
COUNT TWO

With respect to COUNT TWO of the Indictment, we, the jury, find defendant

DANIEL DVORKIN:

GUILTY __________ NOT GUILTY __________

2

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 35 of 39 PageID #:765
COUNT THREE

With respect to COUNT THREE of the Indictment, we, the jury, find defendant

DANIEL DVORKIN:

GUILTY __________ NOT GUILTY __________

3

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 36 of 39 PageID #:766
COUNT FOUR

With respect to COUNT FOUR of the Indictment, we, the jury, find defendant

DANIEL DVORKIN:

GUILTY __________ NOT GUILTY __________

4

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 37 of 39 PageID #:767
COUNT FIVE

With respect to COUNT FIVE of the Indictment, we, the jury, find defendant

DANIEL DVORKIN:

GUILTY __________ NOT GUILTY __________

5

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 38 of 39 PageID #:768
COUNT SIX

With respect to COUNT SIX of the Indictment, we, the jury, find defendant

DANIEL DVORKIN:

GUILTY __________ NOT GUILTY __________

 

FOREPERSON

 

 

 

 

 

 

DATE

6

Case: 1:12-cr-00500 Document #: 98 Filed: 08/29/13 Page 39 of 39 PageID #:769