[VRWC_minion]

Ninth Circuit Model Criminal Jury Instructions

3.5 REASONABLE DOUBT—DEFINED

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced that the defendant is guilty. It is not required that the government prove guilt beyond all possible doubt.

A reasonable doubt is a doubt based upon reason and common sense and is not based purely on speculation. It may arise from a careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, or from lack of evidence.

If after a careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, you are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty, it is your duty to find the defendant not guilty. On the other hand, if after a careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty, it is your duty to find the defendant guilty.

[VRWC_minion]

High Court Warns About Test for Reasonable Doubt

By  LINDA GREENHOUSE,   Special to The New York Times 
 
WASHINGTON, March 22 
  Examining the way judges instruct juries on finding guilt beyond a 
reasonable doubt, the Supreme Court today warned states that a common 
definition of reasonable doubt that refers to jurors' "moral 
certainty" of guilt is outdated potentially confusing. 
 

Link

[Stiv]

A reasonable doubt is a doubt based upon reason and common sense and is not based purely on speculation.

"Purely" is the operative word here. The jury can speculate, but reasonable doubt can not be based solely on speculation. I think those who think the state has not met its burden of proof are indeed using common season to form reasonable speculations.

[Henrietta]

I posted this on an earlier thread. You might find it instructive or interesting:

Re: reasonable doubt

We've all speculated as to what the term 'reasonable doubt' means. Here, from pp 52-53 of "Criminal Law," Professor LaFave's hornbook (not to be confused with "horndog") is what "reasonable doubt" means:

"There must be an abiding conviction, to a moral certainty, of the truth of the charge." Reasonable doubt is "that state of the case, which, after the entire comparison and consideration of all the evidence, leaves the minds of the jurors in that condition that they cannot say they feel an abiding conviction, to a moral certainty, of the truth of the charge."

LaFave is the expert's expert on criminal law in this country.