THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin
Go to Shellow
Collection Table of Contents
Weaker Or Less Satisfactory Evidence
1. Weaker And less
Satisfactory Evidence Should Be Viewed With Distrust
2. Weaker And less
Satisfactory Evidence May Be Considered And Weighed
In Deliberations
3. Improper Questions As
Evidence Of Weakness Of The Case
THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin
1. Weaker And less Satisfactory Evidence Should Be Viewed With Distrust
ALERT: Carefully review the Caveats and Disclaimers before using these materials.
SAMPLE INSTRUCTION # 1:
When the prosecutor offers weaker and less satisfactory evidence, when stronger and more satisfactory evidence could have been obtained, you may view all of its evidence with distrust.
SAMPLE INSTRUCTION # 2:
If the state offers weaker and less satisfactory evidence when stronger and more satisfactory evidence could have been produced, the evidence offered may be viewed with distrust.
AUTHORITIES:
Carranza-Chaidez v. United States, 414 F.2d 503, 505 (9th Cir. 1969); Devitt & Blackmar, §11.34.
CASES WHERE THE ABOVE INSTRUCTION WAS GIVEN:
United States v. Carl D. Mattson, Special Court-Martial, Coast Guard (U.S.C.G. Group Milwaukee, Wis., January, 1976); United States v. Robinson, No. 78-CR-106 (E.D. Wis. Feb., 1979) (modified).
SAMPLE INSTRUCTION # 3:
If you find that a party has offered weaker and less satisfactory evidence when stronger and more satisfactory evidence could have been produced, the evidence offered should be viewed with distrust.
AUTHORITIES:
Carranza-Chaidez v. United States, 414 F.2d 503, 505 (9th Cir. 1969).
CASES WHERE THE ABOVE INSTRUCTION WAS GIVEN:
United States v. Esenberg, No. 76-CR-5 (E.D. Wis. 1976); United States v. Robinson, et al., No. 78-CR-106 (E.D. Wis. 1979) (modified).
RELATED SHELLOW MATERIALS:
See also THE SHELLOW COLLECTION: Evidence – Negative Evidence.
See also THE SHELLOW COLLECTION: Evidence Generally.
RELATED NCJIC MATERIALS:
See NCJIC 36.2.2.10 [Weaker Or Less Satisfactory Evidence Offered By Prosecution: Consideration Of Power Of State To Gather And Produce Evidence].
See also NCJIC 36.2.2.11 [Less Satisfactory Evidence Instruction As Improper Comment On Defendant's Failure To Testify].
THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin
2. Weaker And less Satisfactory Evidence May Be Considered And Weighed In Deliberations
ALERT: Carefully review the Caveats and Disclaimers before using these materials.
SAMPLE INSTRUCTION:
If a party offers weaker and less satisfactory evidence when stronger and more satisfactory evidence could have been produced, you may consider this situation in weighing the evidence. [You must remember, however, that a defendant is not obliged to produce any evidence or to call any witnesses.]
AUTHORITIES:
Carranza-Chaidez v. United States, 414 F.2d 503 (9th Cir. 1969).
CASES WHERE THE ABOVE INSTRUCTION WAS GIVEN:
United States v. Greene, Criminal No. 92-32 (S.D. Iowa 1992); United States v. Zapata, No. 87-CR-84 (E.D. Wis. 1987) (modified and bracketed material deleted); United States v. Matta, No. 82-CR-20 (E.D. Wis. 1982) (bracketed material deleted); United States v. Kramer, No. 81-CR-106 (E.D. Wis. 1982) [Bracketed material deleted]; United States v. Robinson, No. 78-CR-106 (E.D. Wis. 1979) (modified); United States v. Esenberg, No. 76-CR-5 (E.D. Wis. 1976); People v. Nechy, No. 85-4627-FH (Delta County, Mich., Circuit Court 1985).
RELATED SHELLOW MATERIALS:
See also THE SHELLOW COLLECTION: Evidence – Negative Evidence.
See also THE SHELLOW COLLECTION: Evidence Generally.
RELATED NCJIC MATERIALS:
See NCJIC 36.2.2.10 [Weaker Or Less Satisfactory Evidence Offered By Prosecution: Consideration Of Power Of State To Gather And Produce Evidence].
See also NCJIC 36.2.2.11 [Less Satisfactory Evidence Instruction As Improper Comment On Defendant's Failure To Testify].
THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin
3. Improper Questions As Evidence Of Weakness Of The Case
ALERT: Carefully review the Caveats and Disclaimers before using these materials.
SAMPLE INSTRUCTION:
When a lawyer for one of the parties to a lawsuit asks a question which implies an answer, and the answer which is implied would be prejudicial to the other party, and then the Court rules that the question is improper, you may then consider the motivation of the party who asked the question. If you find that the motivation in asking the question was intentionally to place before the Court matters which (he/she) knew were improper, then such conduct is affirmative evidence of the weakness of (his/her) case. If, on the other hand, you find that (he/she) did not recognize the impropriety of (his/her) question and asked the question innocently, either because of lack of education or experience, you may draw no inference concerning either the implications of the question or the weakness of the questioner's case.
CASES WHERE THE ABOVE INSTRUCTION WAS GIVEN:
United States v. Carl D. Mattson, Special Court-Martial, Coast Guard (U.S.C.G. Group, Milwaukee, WI January, 1976).
RELATED SHELLOW MATERIALS:
See also THE SHELLOW COLLECTION: Evidence – Negative Evidence.
See also THE SHELLOW COLLECTION: Evidence Generally.
RELATED NCJIC MATERIALS:
See NCJIC 36.2.2.10 [Weaker Or Less Satisfactory Evidence Offered By Prosecution: Consideration Of Power Of State To Gather And Produce Evidence].
See also NCJIC 36.2.2.11 [Less Satisfactory Evidence Instruction As Improper Comment On Defendant's Failure To Testify].