Let's see if I can start a thread. Here are some NC Pattern Jury Instructions I have quoted before and that relate to how the judge will probably charge the jury when he instructs them, in regard to evidence, the burden of proof, and weighing it all to decide a verdict. There are two types of evidence from which you may find the truth as to the facts of a case -- direct and circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence is the testimony of one who asserts actual knowledge of a fact, such as an eye-witness; circumstantial evidence is proof of a chain or group of facts and circumstances indicating the guilt or innocence of a defendant. The law makes no distinction between the weight to be given to either direct or circumstantial evidence. Nor is a greater degree of certainty required of circumstantial evidence than of direct evidence. You should weigh all the evidence in the case. After weighing all the evidence, if you are not convinced of the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find the defendant not guilty. You should consider all the evidence, arguments, contentions and positions urged by the attorney(s) and any other contention that arises from the evidence; and using your common sense you must determine the truth in this case. Reasonable doubt is a doubt based on reason and common sense, arising out of some or all of the evidence that has been presented, or lack or insufficiency of the evidence, as the case may be. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that fully satisfies or entirely convinces you of the defendant's guilt. You are the sole judges of the weight to be given any evidence. By this I mean, if you decide that certain evidence is believable you must then determine the importance of that evidence in light of all other believable evidence in the case.