Del. P.J.I. Crim. No. 2.6

PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE/REASONABLE DOUBT

The law presumes that every person charged with a crime is innocent. This

presumption of innocence requires a verdict of not guilty, unless you are

convinced by the evidence that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

The burden of proof is upon the State to prove all of the facts necessary to

establish each and every element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt.

The State’s ability to satisfy its burden of proof is not affected by the number of

witnesses it calls. You must consider the quality, not the quantity of the evidence.

Reasonable doubt is a practical standard. Proof that a defendant is

probably guilty is not sufficient. However, there are very few things in this world

that we know with absolute certainty. The law does not require proof that

overcomes every possible doubt.

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced

of the defendant's guilt. Therefore, based upon your conscientious consideration

of the evidence, if you are firmly convinced that the defendant is guilty of the

crime charged, you should find the defendant guilty. If, on the other hand, you

think there is a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty, you must give the

defendant the benefit of the doubt by finding the defendant not guilty.