The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania vs. Graham Spanier Jury Charge Excerpt

1
1
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
2 : DAUPHIN COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
VS. :
3 :
GRAHAM BASIL SPANIER : NO. 3615 CR 2013
4
6
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
7
JURY CHARGE
8
[Pages 1 - 28]
9
10
11 BEFORE: HONORABLE JOHN A. BOCCABELLA, S.J.
12 DATE: MARCH 23, 2017
13 PLACE: COURTROOM NO. 1

DAUPHIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE
14 HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA
15
16
APPEARANCES:
17
LAURA A. DITKA, ESQUIRE
18 PATRICK SCHULTE, ESQUIRE
Office of the Attorney General
19
For - Commonwealth
20
21
SAMUEL SILVER, ESQUIRE
22 EMILY HANLON, ESQUIRE
Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis
23
For - Defendant
24
25
DAUPHIN COUNTY COURT REPORTERS

2
1 * * *
2 THE COURT: Okay. There's an exception to your
3 note taking. Okay? Don't take notes during my instructions.
4 All right? So you can put them back in the envelopes. Okay?
5 I want you to listen to these instructions. They're extremely
6 important.
7 Members of the jury, now that all of the
8 evidence has been presented and the attorneys for both sides
9 have made their closing arguments, it becomes my duty to
10 instruct you in the law which you will apply to the facts as
11 you find them in reaching your verdict.
12 Ms. Ditka raised or referred to the defendant
13 as Ph.D. in family therapy or something to that effect.
14 Dr. Spanier is a Ph.D.; however, the area of expertise or
15 education that she referred to is not in the record. Okay?
16 That is not his Ph.D. All right? So disregard that.
17 In presenting you these instructions, I am
18 going to be reading from a written charge, as almost all
19 judges do, to make certain that what I'm telling you is in
20 accordance with the law of the Commonwealth and is standard
21 and uniform throughout the state.
22 I advise you of this because there is a very
23 typical and understandable tendency not to pay attention to
24 anybody who is reading something. I am not able, as the
25 attorneys are, to present interesting arguments without

3
1 reading. I'm not able to do it, because it is very important
2 because the law that I now instruct you about is accurate and
3 is in accordance with the law of the Commonwealth.
4 I give you this as a warning, and I ask you to
5 pay attention, even though I will be reading to you. And I
6 think you can do that, and you can pay attention if you
7 understand that what I'm about to say to you for probably the
8 next half hour or so provides you with the tools that you will
9 need to make your decisions in this case.
10 If you think about it in those terms, I think
11 you'll understand the importance of what I'm about to say and
12 the necessity for you to pay attention to what I have to say.
13 As I have said, you will apply only the law in
14 which I instruct you. You will not apply any other law which
15 any of you know or think you know, or any of the law mentioned
16 by counsel if it differs from what I am discussing with you
17 now.
18 If you wish instructions on the law in addition
19 to those given to you by me or if you wish clarification of
20 those instructions, then you may, through the foreperson, send
21 an appropriate request, and I'll explain how to do that.
22 As I mentioned to you at the outset, it is my
23 responsibility to decide all questions of law, and you must
24 accept and follow my rulings and instructions on matters of
25 law.

4
1 I am not, however, the judge of the facts. It
2 is not for me to decide what are the true facts concerning the
3 charges against the defendant. You, the jury, are the sole
4 and only judges of the facts. It is your responsibility to
5 weigh the evidence; based on that evidence and the logical
6 inferences which flow from that evidence; to find the facts;
7 and then to decide, after applying the rules of law which I
8 give you to the facts as you have found them, and decide
9 whether the defendant has or has not been proven guilty of any
10 of the charges.
11 In determining the facts, you are to consider
12 only the evidence which has been presented in court and the
13 logical inferences which have derived from that evidence. You
14 are not to rely upon supposition or guesswork or any matters
15 which are not in evidence. You should not regard as true any
16 evidence which you find to be incredible, even if it is
17 uncontradicted.
18 Your determination of the facts should not be
19 based on empathy for or prejudice against the defendant or the
20 Commonwealth, or the nature of the crime, nor on which
21 attorney made the better speech, nor on which attorney you
22 liked better.
23 In my instructions to you, I may -- but if I do
24 it at all, it will only be to a very, very limited extent --
25 refer to some item of evidence or some testimony. I don't

5
1 intend to do so, but it may happen.
2 I don't propose to refer to all of the evidence
3 and go back through the testimony. I will leave this to your
4 recollection, for as I have said, it is your recollections
5 alone that governs this case. You are not bound by my
6 recollections nor by the recollections of counsel as they
7 spoke to you in their closings; nor are you to conclude that
8 any evidence which I call to your attention, if I do so, or
9 which counsel has called to your attention, is the only
10 evidence which you should consider.
11 It is your responsibility to consider all of
12 the evidence that you believe to be material in deliberating
13 upon your verdict.
14 At the beginning of the trial I told you that a
15 fundamental principle of our law is that you must presume the
16 defendant innocent. This means that you are to accept the
17 fact that the mere fact that he was accused and charged with a
18 crime does not mean that he is guilty of it. The defendant
19 has begun this case with a clean slate and continues with a
20 clean slate. He has no obligation to prove his innocence.
21 It is the Commonwealth that bears the burden of
22 convincing you that the defendant, who is presumed innocent,
23 is guilty of the crimes charged. To succeed in its effort,
24 the Commonwealth must convince you that, based on a fair
25 consideration of all of the evidence that has been offered,

6
1 each element of each offense charged has been proven beyond a
2 reasonable doubt.
3 To prove the defendant guilty beyond a
4 reasonable doubt means that the Commonwealth must convince you
5 of his guilt to a level of certainty that the law requires
6 before a verdict of guilty may be returned. A verdict of
7 guilty cannot be based on a suspicion of guilt. Therefore, it
8 is not enough that the Commonwealth's evidence merely casts
9 doubt upon the innocence of the defendant or that it leaves
10 you believing simply that he is probably guilty; rather, to
11 find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, you must
12 be convinced of his guilt to the same degree you would be
13 convinced about a matter of importance in your own life in
14 which you would act with confidence and without restraint or
15 hesitation.
16 Understand, in making decisions of importance
17 in our own lives, we can never act with mathematical
18 certainty. Also, we must recognize that sometimes simply out
19 of fear of making those important decisions, we may imagine
20 doubts that are based on virtually anything. It is important
21 that we make sure that doubts that we allow to affect our
22 decisions are only those that are based upon the facts and
23 reason. The same considerations apply here.
24 In addition, your decision should not be based
25 upon sympathy for any person or any concern for the future

7
1 consequences of your verdict, such as what the penalty might
2 be if you find the defendant guilty. The simple but important
3 question you must decide is whether the evidence convinces you
4 of the defendant's guilt to the degree that, if this were a
5 matter of importance in your own life, you would act on that
6 matter confidently, without hesitation or restraint.
7 Your verdict must arise from your conscientious
8 review of the facts and the law, the application of your good
9 common sense, and your recognition of the importance of the
10 oath you took as a juror to try this case fairly, impartially,
11 and honorably.
12 If, after this consideration, you find that the
13 Commonwealth has convinced you that the defendant is guilty
14 beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find him guilty;
15 otherwise, you must find the defendant not guilty.
16 It is entirely up to the defendant in every
17 criminal trial whether or not to testify. He has an absolute
18 right founded on the Constitution of the United States and the
19 Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to remain
20 silent. You must not draw any inference of guilt or any
21 inference adverse to the defendant from the fact that he did
22 not testify.
23 Members of the jury, I'm going to instruct you
24 on the law that applies to this case in regard to the elements
25 of each offense. To assist you in your deliberations, I'm

8
1 going to send back a portion of my instructions, the ones that
2 define the offenses and the elements of those offenses, to use
3 in the jury room.
4 If any matter is repeated or stated in
5 different ways in my instructions, no emphasis is intended.
6 Do not draw any inference because of a repetition. Do not
7 single out any individual rule or instruction and ignore the
8 others. Do not place greater emphasis on the elements of the
9 offenses simply because I have provided them to you in writing
10 and other instructions are not provided in writing. Consider
11 all of my instructions as a whole and each in the light of the
12 others.
13 If, during your deliberations, you have a
14 question or feel that you need further assistance or
15 instructions from me, write your question on a sheet of paper
16 and give it to the court officer who will be standing by the
17 jury door and who, in turn, will give it to me.
18 You may ask questions about any of the
19 instructions that I have given to you, whether they are given
20 to you orally or in writing.
21 The defendant has been charged with endangering
22 the welfare of a child. To find the defendant guilty of this
23 offense, you must find that each of the following elements has
24 been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
25 This is in regard to Count 1: First, that the

9
1 defendant endangered the welfare of a child by violating a
2 duty of care, protection, or support.
3 Second, that the defendant endangered the
4 welfare of the child knowingly. A person's conduct is knowing
5 when he is aware that it is practically certain that his
6 conduct will cause a particular result.
7 Third, that the defendant was at the time a
8 parent, guardian, person supervising the welfare of a child
9 under the age of 18, or a person that employs or supervises
10 such a person. The term "person supervising the welfare of a
11 child" means a person other than a parent or guardian that
12 provides care, education, training, or control of a child.
13 And the fourth element is that the child was
14 under the age of 18 at the time of the endangering.
15 The second charge in Count 2 is endangering the
16 welfare of a child, but somewhat different than Count 1. The
17 elements of that endangering charge are, first, that the
18 defendant was in an official capacity with respect to the
19 child. A defendant is in an official capacity with respect to
20 a child where, in the course of his employment, occupation, or
21 practice of his profession, he comes into contact with that
22 child.
23 Second, that the defendant prevented or
24 interfered with the making of a report of suspected child
25 abuse under the laws of Pennsylvania. And, third, that the

10
1 defendant did so intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly.
2 Those terms are defined as follows: A person
3 acts intentionally when it is his conscious object or purpose
4 to cause such a result. A person acts knowingly when he is
5 aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will
6 cause such a result. A person acts recklessly when he
7 consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk
8 that such consequence will result from his conduct. The
9 disregard of the risk involves a gross deviation from the
10 standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in
11 the actor's situation.
12 If, after considering all of the evidence, you
13 find that the Commonwealth has established beyond a reasonable
14 doubt all of the elements that I have stated, you must find
15 the defendant guilty; otherwise, you must find the defendant
16 not guilty.
17 The defendant is also charged in Count 3 with
18 conspiracy to commit endangering the welfare of children.
19 In Pennsylvania, joining in a conspiracy or
20 creating a conspiracy is itself a crime. Even if the crime
21 the people are planning is not carried out, the members of a
22 conspiracy are still responsible for the distinct crime of
23 conspiracy.
24 In general terms, a conspiracy is an agreement
25 between two or more persons to commit a crime. A conspiracy

11
1 exists once two conditions are met: One, there is an
2 agreement; and one of the members then commits some overt act,
3 some act, to help achieve the goal of the conspiracy.
4 I will explain in a little bit more detail what
5 each of those elements is.
6 The first element of conspiracy is an
7 agreement. It can be stated in words or unspoken, but
8 acknowledged, but it must be an agreement in the sense that
9 two or more people have come to an understanding that they
10 agree to act together to commit a crime or crimes. Their
11 agreement does not have to cover the details of how the crime
12 will be committed, nor does it have to call for all of them to
13 participate in actually committing the crime. They can agree
14 that one of them will do the particular act to commit the
15 crime. What is necessary is that the parties agree -- in
16 other words, they come to a firm, common understanding -- that
17 a crime will be committed.
18 Although the agreement itself is the essence of
19 the conspiracy, a defendant cannot be convicted of conspiracy
20 unless he or a fellow conspirator does something more, what is
21 called an overt act, in furtherance of the conspiracy.
22 An overt act is an act by any member of the
23 conspiracy that would serve to further the goal of the
24 conspiracy. The overt act can be criminal or noncriminal in
25 itself, as long as it is designed to put the conspiratorial

12
1 agreement into effect. This is to show that the parties have
2 a firm agreement and are not just thinking or talking about
3 committing a crime.
4 The overt act shows that the conspiracy has
5 reached an action stage. If a conspirator actually commits or
6 attempts to commit the agreed crime, that obviously would be
7 an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy. But a small
8 act or step that is much more preliminary and a lot less
9 significant can satisfy the overt act requirement.
10 The Commonwealth may prove a conspiracy by
11 direct evidence or by circumstantial evidence. People who
12 conspire often do their conspiring secretly and try to cover
13 up afterwards. In many conspiracy trials, circumstantial
14 evidence is the best or only evidence on the questions of
15 whether there was an agreement -- that is, a common
16 understanding -- and whether the conspirators shared the
17 intent to promote or facilitate committing the object crime.
18 Thus, you may, if you think it proper, infer that there was a
19 conspiracy from the relationship, conduct, and acts of the
20 defendant and his alleged co-conspirators, and the
21 circumstances surrounding their activity; however, the
22 evidence of this must support your conclusion beyond a
23 reasonable doubt.
24 A defendant cannot be convicted because he was
25 present with others or even because he knew what the others

13
1 had planned or were doing. There must be proof of an
2 agreement between the defendant and another person or persons
3 to form or continue a conspiracy. To be proven guilty of
4 being a conspirator, the defendant must have intended to act
5 jointly with the others charged and must have intended that
6 the crimes alleged to be the goal of the conspiracy would be
7 committed.
8 Each defendant has been charged with
9 endangering the welfare of a child -- this defendant has been
10 charged with endangering the welfare of a child as a course of
11 conduct. A course of conduct means a pattern of actions
12 composed of more than one act over a period of time, however
13 short, evidencing a continuity of that conduct.
14 I already have instructed you on the four
15 elements that you must find the prosecution has proven beyond
16 a reasonable doubt in order to find the defendant guilty as to
17 Count 1.
18 To find the defendant guilty of endangering the
19 welfare of a child as a course of conduct under Count 1, you
20 must find that the prosecution has proven beyond a reasonable
21 doubt each of these four elements and that the defendant
22 violated a duty of care, protection, or support through a
23 pattern of actions over a period of time evidencing a
24 continuity of conduct.
25 I also have instructed you on the three

14
1 elements that you must find the prosecution has proven beyond
2 a reasonable doubt in order to find the defendant guilty as to
3 Count 2. To find the defendant guilty of endangering the
4 welfare of a child as a course of conduct under Count 2, you
5 must find that the prosecution has proven beyond a reasonable
6 doubt each of these three elements, and that the defendant
7 prevented or interfered with the making of a report of
8 suspected child abuse through a pattern of actions over a
9 period of time evidencing a continuity of conduct.
10 In my instructions, I have given you the legal
11 definition of the crimes charged. Motive is not a part of
12 that definition. The Commonwealth is not required to prove a
13 motive for the commission of the crimes charged. However, you
14 should consider any evidence of motive or lack of motive.
15 Knowledge of human nature tells us that an
16 ordinary person is more likely to commit a crime if he has a
17 motive than if he has none. You should weigh and consider any
18 evidence tending to show motive or the absence of motive along
19 with all other evidence in deciding whether the defendant is
20 guilty or not guilty.
21 It is entirely up to you to determine what
22 weight should be given the evidence concerning motive.
23 The Commonwealth contended that there was
24 evidence tending to show that the defendant entered into some
25 conduct, which I will not go into, which the Commonwealth

15
1 would have you infer was a consciousness by the defendant of
2 his guilt. If you believe that that evidence was presented
3 and that it is material to your decision, you may consider it
4 as tending to prove the defendant's consciousness of guilt;
5 however, you are not required to do so. You should consider
6 and weigh any evidence that you think belongs in this category
7 along with all of the other evidence in this case.
8 As judges of the facts, you are the sole judges
9 of the credibility of the witnesses and their testimony. This
10 means you must judge the truthfulness and accuracy of each
11 witnesses' testimony and decide whether to believe all or a
12 part or none of that testimony. The following are some of the
13 factors that you may and should consider when judging
14 credibility and deciding whether or not to believe testimony:
15 Was the witness able to see, hear, or know the
16 things about which he or she testified? How well could the
17 witness remember and describe the things about which he or she
18 testified? Was the ability of the witness to see, hear, know,
19 remember, or describe those things affected by youth, old age,
20 or by any physical, mental, or intellectual deficiency?
21 Did the witness testify in a convincing manner?
22 How did he or she look, act, and speak while testifying? Was
23 his or her testimony uncertain, confused, self-contradictory,
24 or evasive?
25 Did the witness have any interest in the

16
1 outcome of the case, any bias, prejudice, or other motive that
2 might affect his or her testimony? How well does the
3 testimony of the witness square with the other evidence in the
4 case, including the testimony of other witnesses? Was it
5 contradicted or supported by the other testimony and evidence?
6 Does it make sense?
7 If you believe some part of the testimony of a
8 witness to be inaccurate, consider whether the inaccuracy
9 casts doubt upon the rest of his or her testimony. This may
10 depend on whether he or she has been inaccurate in an
11 important matter or a minor detail, and on any possible
12 explanation. For example, did the witness make an honest
13 mistake, simply forget, or did he or she deliberately falsify
14 testimony?
15 While you are judging the credibility of each
16 witness, you are likely to be judging the credibility of other
17 witnesses or evidence. If there is a real irreconcilable
18 conflict in the testimony, it is up to you to decide which, if
19 any, conflicting testimony or evidence to believe. As the
20 sole judges of credibility and fact, you, the jury, are
21 responsible to give the testimony of every witness and all the
22 other evidence whatever credibility and weight it deserves.
23 During the course of the testimony, there were
24 certain instances where witnesses were confronted with prior
25 statements that they had given, either under oath or not under

17
1 oath, that were inconsistent with the statement they gave on
2 the stand. You may, if you choose, regard this evidence as
3 proof of the truth of anything the witness said in the earlier
4 statement. You may also consider this evidence to help you
5 judge the credibility and weight of the testimony given by the
6 witness at this trial.
7 Likewise, you may have heard evidence during
8 the testimony of certain witnesses that they had made a
9 statement on an earlier occasion that was entirely consistent
10 with the testimony he or she gave from the stand. This
11 evidence may be considered by you for one purpose only; that
12 is, to help you judge the credibility and weight of the
13 testimony given by that particular witness as a witness in
14 this trial.
15 You may not regard evidence of a prior
16 consistent statement as proof of the truth of any matter
17 asserted in that earlier statement.
18 Where there is a conflict in the testimony, you
19 have the duty of deciding which testimony to believe, but you
20 should first try to reconcile -- that is, fit together -- any
21 conflicts in the testimony if you can fairly do so.
22 Discrepancies and conflicts between the testimony of different
23 witnesses may or may not cause you to disbelieve some or all
24 of their testimony. Remember that two or more persons
25 witnessing an incident may see or hear it happen differently.

18
1 Also, it is not uncommon for a witness to be innocently
2 mistaken in his or her recollection of how something happened.
3 If you cannot reconcile a conflict in the
4 testimony, it is up to you to decide which testimony, if any,
5 to believe and which to reject as untrue or inaccurate. In
6 making that decision, consider whether the conflict involves a
7 matter of importance or merely some detail, and whether the
8 conflict is brought about by an innocent mistake or an
9 intentional falsehood.
10 You should also keep in mind the other factors
11 already discussed which go into deciding whether or not to
12 believe any witness.
13 In deciding which of conflicting testimony to
14 believe, you should not necessarily be swayed by the number of
15 witnesses on either side. If you decide that a witness has
16 deliberately falsified their testimony about a material
17 point -- that is, about a matter that could affect the outcome
18 of this trial -- you may for that reason alone choose to
19 disbelieve the rest of his or her testimony, but you are not
20 required to do so. You should consider not only the
21 deliberate falsehood but also all other factors bearing on the
22 witness's credibility in deciding whether to believe other
23 parts of his or her testimony.
24 Again, it is entirely up to the defendant in
25 every criminal trial whether or not to testimony. You must

19
1 not draw any inference of guilt or any other inference adverse
2 to the defendant from the fact that he did not testify.
3 Our system of criminal law allows you to
4 consider only the evidence, arguments, and legal instructions
5 that are presented during the course of the trial. You must
6 avoid anything that might result or appear to result in your
7 being exposed to outside information or influence. Allowing
8 outside information to affect your judgment is unfair and
9 prejudicial to the parties and could lead to this case having
10 to be retried. Therefore, you must not communicate with
11 anybody else about the case or listen to others talk about the
12 case until you have completed your deliberations.
13 The prohibition against discussing this case
14 amongst yourselves is obviously gone when you walk out of that
15 door and into the jury deliberation room. That is the time
16 when you are to discuss all of these matters amongst
17 yourselves.
18 I will reiterate -- and I don't know if you
19 have your cell phones or your computers or whatever device you
20 may have -- but you are specifically prohibited from using any
21 such device anytime during your deliberations.
22 I mentioned before circumstantial evidence.
23 Evidence is of two varieties: Direct and circumstantial
24 evidence. On the one hand, there is direct evidence, which is
25 testimony from a witness from his or her own personal

20
1 knowledge, such as something that he or she saw or heard
2 himself or herself.
3 The other type is circumstantial evidence,
4 which is testimony about facts that point to the existence of
5 other facts that are in question.
6 Whether or not circumstantial evidence is proof
7 of the other facts in question depends in part on the
8 application of common sense and human experience. You should
9 recognize that it is sometimes necessary to rely upon
10 circumstantial evidence in criminal cases, particularly where
11 the crime was committed in secret.
12 Here is an illustration of the difference
13 between direct and circumstantial evidence: A witness may
14 testify that it was raining at a particular time because he
15 looked outside -- he looked outside and saw the rain coming
16 down. That would constitute direct evidence that it rained.
17 If, however, the witness did not actually see
18 the rain coming down, but when he first went outside in the
19 morning, he saw that the sidewalk was wet, he can testify to
20 those facts as circumstantial evidence for the jury to
21 conclude that it had rained during the night. However, other
22 evidence, such as a turned-on garden hose or children throwing
23 water balloons, may explain the water on the sidewalk.
24 In deciding whether or not to accept
25 circumstantial evidence as proof of the facts in question, you

21
1 must be satisfied, first, that the testimony of the witness is
2 truthful and accurate, and, second, that the existence of the
3 facts the witness testifies to leads to the conclusion that
4 the facts in question also happened.
5 Circumstantial evidence alone may be sufficient
6 to prove a defendant's guilty. If there are several separate
7 pieces of circumstantial evidence, it is not necessary that
8 each piece standing separately convince you of a defendant's
9 guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Instead, before you may find
10 the defendant guilty, all the pieces of circumstantial
11 evidence, when considered together, must reasonably and
12 naturally lead to the conclusion that the defendant is guilty
13 and must convince you of that guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
14 In other words, you may find the defendant
15 guilty based on circumstantial evidence alone, but only if the
16 total amount and quality of that evidence convinces you of the
17 defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
18 As I told you earlier -- and a lot of this I've
19 already mentioned to you, but I want you to understand that
20 this is the law that you are to follow.
21 The speeches of counsel are not part of the
22 evidence and you should not consider them as such. In
23 deciding the case, you should carefully consider the evidence
24 in light of the various reasons and arguments each lawyer
25 presented. It is the right and, in fact, the duty of each

22
1 lawyer to discuss the evidence in a manner that is most
2 favorable to the side he or she represents.
3 You should be guided by each lawyer's arguments
4 to the extent they are supported by the evidence and insofar
5 as they aid you in applying your own reason and common sense;
6 however, you are not required to accept the arguments of
7 either lawyer. It is for you, and you alone, to decide the
8 case based on the evidence as it was presented from the
9 witness stand and in accordance with the instructions I am now
10 giving you. That includes anything the lawyers may have said
11 about the facts, the testimony, any other pieces of evidence,
12 and any principle of law.
13 I allowed you to take notes. I don't know
14 whether that was a help or a hindrance, whether you're going
15 to like the fact that I did that or not. However, to the
16 extent that your notes have been taken -- and you weren't
17 required to do so -- your notes may help you to refresh your
18 recollection of the testimony and should be treated as a
19 supplement to, rather than a substitute for, your memory.
20 Your notes are only to be used by you as memory aids and
21 should not take precedence over your independent recollection
22 of the facts.
23 Those of you who did not take notes should not
24 be overly influenced by the notes of other jurors. It is just
25 as easy to write something down incorrectly as it is to

23
1 remember it incorrectly. And your fellow juror's notes are
2 entitled to no greater weight than each juror's independent
3 memory. Although you may refer to your notes during
4 deliberations, give no more or no less weight to the view of a
5 fellow juror just because that juror did or did not take
6 notes.
7 Although you are permitted to use your notes
8 for your deliberations, the only notes you may use are the
9 notes you write in the courtroom during the proceedings on the
10 materials distributed by the Court staff. Each time that we
11 adjourn, your notes were collected. And believe me, nobody
12 has looked at those notes. All right? At the conclusion of
13 your deliberations and after a verdict has been reached, your
14 notes will be destroyed immediately.
15 Before you retire to decide this case, I would
16 like to provide you with some final guidelines for the way in
17 which you conduct your deliberations and how you may properly
18 arrive at a verdict.
19 It is my responsibility to decide all questions
20 of law; therefore, you must accept and follow my rulings and
21 instructions on matters of law. I am not, however, the judge
22 of the facts. It is not for me to decide what are the true
23 facts concerning the charges against the defendant. You, the
24 jurors, are the sole judges of the facts. It will be your
25 responsibility to consider the evidence, to find the facts,

24
1 and applying the law as I have given it to you to the facts as
2 you find them, to decide whether the defendant has been proven
3 guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
4 Your decision in this case, as in every case
5 you hear, is a matter of considerable importance. Remember
6 that it is your responsibility as jurors to perform your
7 duties and reach a verdict based on the evidence as it was
8 presented during the trial; however, in deciding the facts,
9 you may properly apply common sense and draw upon your own
10 everyday practical knowledge of life as each of you has
11 experienced it.
12 You should keep your deliberations free of any
13 bias or prejudice. Both the Commonwealth and the defendant
14 have a right to expect you to consider the evidence
15 conscientiously and to apply the law as I have outlined it to
16 you.
17 Upon retiring to deliberate, you should select
18 one of you to be the foreperson. He or she is the one who
19 will announce the verdict in this courtroom, after you have
20 finished deliberating, and will sign the verdict sheet.
21 Your verdict must be unanimous. This means
22 that in order to return a verdict, each of you must agree to
23 it. You have a duty to consult with each other and to
24 deliberate with a view to reaching an agreement if it can be
25 done without doing any violence to your individual judgment.

25
1 Each of you must decide the case for yourself,
2 but only after there has been impartial consideration with
3 your fellow jurors. In the course of deliberations, each of
4 you as jurors should not hesitate to re-examine your own views
5 and change your opinion if convinced it is erroneous. If
6 convinced it is erroneous. However, no juror should surrender
7 an honest conviction as to the weight or effect of the
8 evidence solely because of the opinion of your fellow jurors
9 or for the mere purpose of returning a verdict.
10 In closing, I would like to suggest that you
11 will be able to deliberate more easily and in a way that will
12 be better for all concerned if each of you treats your fellow
13 jurors and their views with the same courtesy and respect you
14 would other persons in your everyday life.
15 Members of the jury, as I said, I am going to
16 send back with you the definitions of the offenses with which
17 the defendant is charged. Remember that just because I'm
18 giving you those, that doesn't mean that those particular
19 instructions are any more important than the other
20 instructions that I have given you.
21 Again, remember that if during the course of
22 your deliberations you have a question or feel that you need
23 further assistance or instructions from me, write your
24 question on a piece of paper, give it to the person outside
25 the jury room door.

26
1 I'm going to show you the verdict slip. And
2 you can't see it from where you are, but I'm going to just
3 point out a few things -- can you hear me?
4 A JUROR: Yes.
5 THE COURT: -- a few things that are contained
6 on the verdict slip.
7 At the top is the caption of the case, and it
8 says Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Graham Spanier. It has
9 the case number. It has my name on there as the judge, and
10 the date that it started, March 20th.
11 Under that it says, "We, the jury, having sworn
12 or affirmed, do say," and then today's date, which would be
13 March 23rd, "that we find Graham Spanier, Count 1, endangering
14 the welfare of children," and then it has a column that says
15 guilty and a column that says not guilty. Put a check in the
16 appropriate column. And that's for each of the Counts 1 and 2
17 and Count 3.
18 However, with regards to Counts 1 and 2 there
19 is an additional column. It says, "course of conduct, yes or
20 no?" If you find that there was a course of conduct, as I
21 have described it to you in my instructions, you write yes or
22 no for each of those.
23 At the bottom there is a place for the
24 foreperson's name, signature, and date.
25 If you have any questions about this when you

27
1 get back into the jury deliberation room and need any further
2 explanation, write it on a piece of paper and give it to me.
3 Okay? Make sure I get it. I'll explain it to you.
4 The case is now in your hands, members of the
5 jury. Okay? All I ask is that you continue to give this
6 matter the respect and the attention that you have done so for
7 the last three days. Good luck.
8 The first 12, okay, the first 12 of the jury,
9 is there anyone that for any reason believes they could not
10 retire at this time and deliberate with a view towards
11 reaching a verdict?
12 Okay. I see no response. So I'm going to ask
13 the alternates to step out and aside. Give your booklets to
14 the tipstaff. And good luck, everyone.
15 I am going to send out with the jury the
16 exhibits that were presented. You're not going to have the
17 projector and the screen, but you're going to have the
18 exhibits, okay, that were presented by the Commonwealth and
19 two that were presented by the defendant. All right? Don't
20 lose them. Okay? Keep them together. Don't look at them,
21 tear them up, and throw them away.
22 All right. Good luck.
23
24 * * *
25

28
1 C E R T I F I C A T I O N
4 I hereby certify that the proceedings and
5 evidence are contained fully and accurately in the notes taken
6 by me on the hearing of the above cause, and that this
7 transcript of proceedings meets the format specifications
8 established by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in Rule 4010.
10
____
11 C.L. Hansberry, RDR, CRR, CRC
Official Court Reporter
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania vs. Graham Spanier Jury Charge Excerpt

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania vs. Graham Spanier Jury Charge Excerpt

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

1

11 BEFORE: HONORABLE JOHN A. BOCCABELLA, S.J.

12 DATE: MARCH 23, 2017

13 PLACE: COURTROOM NO. 1

DAUPHIN COUNTY COURT REPORTERS

2 THE COURT: Okay. There's an exception to your

3 note taking. Okay? Don't take notes during my instructions.

5 I want you to listen to these instructions. They're extremely

7 Members of the jury, now that all of the

9 have made their closing arguments, it becomes my duty to

11 you find them in reaching your verdict.

12 Ms. Ditka raised or referred to the defendant

13 as Ph.D. in family therapy or something to that effect.

14 Dr. Spanier is a Ph.D.; however, the area of expertise or

15 education that she referred to is not in the record. Okay?

16 That is not his Ph.D. All right? So disregard that.

17 In presenting you these instructions, I am

18 going to be reading from a written charge, as almost all

19 judges do, to make certain that what I'm telling you is in

20 accordance with the law of the Commonwealth and is standard

21 and uniform throughout the state.

22 I advise you of this because there is a very

23 typical and understandable tendency not to pay attention to

24 anybody who is reading something. I am not able, as the

25 attorneys are, to present interesting arguments without

DAUPHIN COUNTY COURT REPORTERS

1 reading. I'm not able to do it, because it is very important

3 is in accordance with the law of the Commonwealth.

4 I give you this as a warning, and I ask you to

5 pay attention, even though I will be reading to you. And I

9 need to make your decisions in this case.

10 If you think about it in those terms, I think

11 you'll understand the importance of what I'm about to say and

12 the necessity for you to pay attention to what I have to say.

13 As I have said, you will apply only the law in

16 by counsel if it differs from what I am discussing with you

18 If you wish instructions on the law in addition

19 to those given to you by me or if you wish clarification of

20 those instructions, then you may, through the foreperson, send

21 an appropriate request, and I'll explain how to do that.

22 As I mentioned to you at the outset, it is my

23 responsibility to decide all questions of law, and you must

24 accept and follow my rulings and instructions on matters of

DAUPHIN COUNTY COURT REPORTERS

1 I am not, however, the judge of the facts. It

4 and only judges of the facts. It is your responsibility to

5 weigh the evidence; based on that evidence and the logical

6 inferences which flow from that evidence; to find the facts;

7 and then to decide, after applying the rules of law which I

11 In determining the facts, you are to consider

13 logical inferences which have derived from that evidence. You

14 are not to rely upon supposition or guesswork or any matters

16 evidence which you find to be incredible, even if it is

18 Your determination of the facts should not be

19 based on empathy for or prejudice against the defendant or the

20 Commonwealth, or the nature of the crime, nor on which

21 attorney made the better speech, nor on which attorney you

23 In my instructions to you, I may -- but if I do

24 it at all, it will only be to a very, very limited extent --

25 refer to some item of evidence or some testimony. I don't

DAUPHIN COUNTY COURT REPORTERS

1 intend to do so, but it may happen.

2 I don't propose to refer to all of the evidence

3 and go back through the testimony. I will leave this to your