authorized to convict that defendant. if the state fails to prove a defendant s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, it would be your duty to acquit that defendant. facts and circumstances that merely place upon a defendant a grave suspicion of the crime or crimes charged or that merely raise a speculation or conjecture of a defendant s guilt are not sufficient to authorize a conviction of a defendant. now, your oath requires that you will decide this case based on the evidence. evidence is the means by which a fact that is put in issue is established or disproved. evidence includes all of the testimony of the witnesses or the equivalent such as depositions, any exhibits admitted during the trial, and stipulations of the attorneys. as i have previously charged you, the stipulation is an agreement between the parties concerning some fact or facts which you, as the jury, are bound to accept as facts during your deliberations.
made, y all got him? and him jumping into the fray. so i think for most people, common sense, they understand the analogy of driving a lookout vehicle, that s how he can still be involved in a felony murder inside the bank. that was a good analogy. it s a tough call. i have questions whether she made a bad strategic choice in not focusing on race more. you have to play to what you know with your jury, you v but you also have to trust the jury, and she s trusting the jury here that they re going to follow the law and use their common sense. that s what she s asking them to do. no question. and repeating it s about the facts of case, not point of view or the goodness or badness of the defendants involved. carolyn polisi, very different cases, but in both the rittenhouse case and this one, you have the defendant saying justifying self-defense saying i had my weapon and i was fearful that the other person might take that weapon and turn it on me. how does the law see that,
agent seacrest knows. i can t compel anybody to talk to me. all right. let s go ahead and talk about defendant bryan. 307 burford. you see the video. i m not playing for you again. it s motion activated on the coach. travis mcmichael s white ford f-150 pickup truck comes in front. driveway decision. this is important, ladies and gentlemen. this is really important. y all got it? why is this important? what does this say? mr. bryan, from his porch, can tell that they are chasing and trying to falsely imprison, stop, confine mr. arbery. he can tell it from his porch. he knows exactly what they re doing. y all got him? he knows what they re doing, and you know what he chooses to do?
favor. this presumption remains with the defendant until it is overcome by the state with evidence that is sufficient to convince you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime or crimes charged. no person shall be convicted of any crime unless and until each element of the crime is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. the burden of proof rests upon the state to prove every material allegation of the indictment and every essential element of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt. however, the state is not required to prove guilt of the accused beyond all doubt or to a mathematical certainty. a reasonable doubt means just what it says. it is a doubt of fair-minded, impartial juror honestly seeking the truth. it is a doubt based upon common sense and reason. it does not mean a vague or arbitrary doubt, but it is a doubt from which a reason can be given arising from a consideration of the evidence or
the specific allegations brought by the state. the defendants have each entered a plea of not guilty to the indictment. the indictment and the pleas form the issues that you are to decide. neither the indictment nor the pleas of not guilty should be considered as evidence. the defendants are charged in the diindictment with crimes th are violations of certain laws of the state of georgia. i want to emphasize to you that the indictment, including all of the counts therein, and the pleas of not guilty, are the legal procedures by which these criminal charges are brought against each defendant. the charges and the plea of not guilty are not evidence of guilt, and you should not consider them as evidence or implication of guilt of any crime whatsoever. the defendants are presumed innocent until each is proven guilty. each defendant enters upon the trial of the case with a presumption of innocence in his