ONE WHICH WAVERS AND VACILLATES, THEN THE CHARGE IS NOT PROVED BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT AND YOU MUST FIND THE DEFENDANT NOT GUILTY BECAUSE THE DOUBT IS REASONABLE.
IT IS TO THE EVIDENCE INTRODUCED UPON THIS TRIAL AND TO IT ALONE THAT YOU ARE TO LOOK FOR THAT PROOF.
A REASONABLE DOUBT AS TO THE GUILT OF THE DEFENDANT MAY ARISE FROM THE EVIDENCE, FROM CONFLICT IN THE EVIDENCE OR FROM THE LACK OF EVIDENCE.
IF YOU HAVE A REASONABLE DOUBT, YOU SHOULD FIND THE DEFENDANT NOT GUILTY. IF YOU HAVE NO REASONABLE DOUBT, YOU SHOULD FIND THE DEFENDANT GUILTY.
IT IS UP TO YOU TO DECIDE WHAT EVIDENCE IS RELIABLE. YOU SHOULD USE YOUR COMMON SENSE IN DECIDING WHICH IS THE BEST EVIDENCE AND WHICH EVIDENCE SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON IN CONSIDERING YOUR VERDICT.
YOU MAY FIND SOME OF THE EVIDENCE NOT RELIABLE OR LESS RELIABLE THAN OTHER EVIDENCE. YOU SHOULD CONSIDER HOW THE WITNESSES ACTED AS WELL AS WHAT THEY SAID.
SOME THINGS YOU SHOULD CONSIDER ARE: DID THE WITNESS SEEM TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE AND KNOW THE THINGS ABOUT WHICH THE WITNESS TESTIFIED? DID THE WITNESS SEEM TO HAVE AN ACCURATE MEMORY? WAS THE WITNESS HONEST AND STRAIGHTFORWARD IN ANSWERING THE ATTORNEYS' QUESTIONS? DID THE WITNESS HAVE SOME INTEREST IN HOW THE CASE SHOULD BE DECIDED? DOES THE WITNESS'S TESTIMONY AGREE WITH THE OTHER TESTIMONY AND OTHER EVIDENCE IN THE CASE? DID THE WITNESS AT SOME OTHER TIME MAKE A STATEMENT THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE TESTIMONY HE GAVE IN COURT?
YOU MAY RELY UPON YOUR OWN CONCLUSION ABOUT THE WITNESS. A JUROR MAY BELIEVE OR DISBELIEVE ALL OR ANY PART OF THE EVIDENCE OR THE TESTIMONY OF ANY WITNESS.
EXPERT WITNESSES ARE LIKE OTHER WITNESSES WITH ONE EXCEPTION. THE LAW PERMITS AN EXPERT WITNESS TO GIVE HIS OPINION.
HOWEVER, AN EXPERT'S OPINION MAY ONLY BE RELIED UPON WHEN GIVEN ON A SUBJECT ABOUT WHICH YOU BELIEVE HIM TO BE AN EXPERT.
AS WITH OTHER WITNESSES, YOU MAY BELIEVE OR DISBELIEVE ALL OR ANY PART OF AN EXPERT'S TESTIMONY.
THE CONSTITUTION REQUIRES THE STATE TO PROVE ITS ACCUSATIONS AGAINST THE DEFENDANT. IT IS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE DEFENDANT TO DISPROVE ANYTHING. NOR IS THE DEFENDANT REQUIRED TO PROVE HIS INNOCENCE. IT IS UP TO THE STATE TO PROVE THE DEFENDANT'S GUILT BY EVIDENCE.
THESE ARE SOME GENERAL RULES THAT APPLY TO YOUR DISCUSSIONS; THAT IS, YOUR DELIBERATIONS AS JURORS. YOU MUST FOLLOW THESE RULES IN ORDER TO RETURN A LAWFUL VERDICT.
YOU MUST FOLLOW THE LAW AS IT IS SET OUT IN THESE INSTRUCTIONS. IF YOU FAIL TO FOLLOW THE LAW, YOUR VERDICT WILL BE A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. THERE IS NO REASON FOR FAILING TO FOLLOW THE LAW IN THIS CASE. ALL OF US ARE DEPENDING UPON YOU TO MAKE A WISE AND LEGAL DECISION IN THIS MATTER.
THIS CASE MUST BE DECIDED ONLY UPON THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU HAVE HEARD FROM THE ANSWERS OF WITNESSES AND HAVE SEEN IN THE FORM OF