(N.J.S.A. 2C:16-1a(3))
(Defendant) is charged by this indictment with bias intimidation. Bias intimidation is a crime according to the following statute:
A person is guilty of the crime of bias intimidation if he [CHOOSE APPLICABLE] commits, attempts to commit, conspires with another to commit, or threatens the immediate commission of [SPECIFY OFFENSE] 1 under circumstances that caused any victim of [the underlying crime] to be intimidated and the victim, considering the manner in which the offense was committed, reasonably believed either that
a. [the offense] was committed with a purpose to intimidate the victim or any person or entity in whose welfare the victim is interested because of [CHOOSE APPROPRIATE CATEGORY: race, color, religion, gender, handicap, sexual orientation, or ethnicity],
or
b. the victim or the victim’s property was selected to be the target of the [crime] because of the victim’s [CHOOSE APPROPRIATE CATEGORY]: race, color, religion, gender, handicap, sexual orientation, or ethnicity.
For you to find (defendant) guilty of bias intimidation, the State must prove each of the following essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. That (defendant) committed an underlying crime or offense.
2. That (defendant) did so [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE] with a purpose to intimidate the victim or any person or entity in whose welfare the victim is interested because of [CHOOSE APPROPRIATE CATEGORY] the victim’s race, color, religion, gender, handicap, sexual orientation, or ethnicity; [OR] where the victim or the victim’s property was selected to be the target of the underlying crime because of
1 The offenses specified in N.J.S.A. 2C:16-1(a) are violations of Chapters 11 through 18 of Title 2C of the New Jersey Statutes; N.J.S.A. 2C:33-4; N.J.S.A. 2C:39-3; and N.J.S.A. 2C:39-4 or -5.
BIAS INTIMIDATION
[REASONABLE BELIEF OF VICTIM]
N.J.S.A. 2C:16-1a(3)
Page 2 of 5
[REPEAT CATEGORY] the victim’s race, color, religion, gender, handicap, sexual orientation, or ethnicity.
The first element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that (defendant) [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE] committed, attempted to commit, conspired with another to commit, or threatened the immediate commission of . Here, (defendant) is charged with [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE]: committing, attempting to commit, conspiring to commit, or threatening to commit [SPECIFY OFFENSE]. As I told you earlier, the essential elements of that offense are [REPEAT ELEMENTS].
[CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE]
A person is guilty of attempt if, acting purposefully, he/she does or omits to do anything which, under the circumstances as a reasonable person would believe them to be, is an act or omission constituting a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in his/her committing the scene.2
[OR]
A conspiracy to commit a crime is a crime in itself, separate and distinct from the [SPECIFY OFFENSE]. In other words, a person may be found guilty of a conspiracy regardless of whether he is guilty or not guilty of . For you to find that (defendant) conspired to commit an offense, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he agreed that he or someone else would engage in conduct which constitutes that offense or an attempt or solicitation to commit it; and that the conspirator’s purpose was to promote or facilitate a [SPECIFY OFFENSE].
[CHOOSE APPROPRIATE SECOND ELEMENT]
The second element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that the (defendant) committed with a purpose to intimidate the victim or any person or entity in whose welfare the victim is interested because of the victim’s [CHOOSE
2 QUAERE : Does this statute apply to an attempt to commit a disorderly person offense, such as criminal mischief?
BIAS INTIMIDATION
[REASONABLE BELIEF OF VICTIM]
N.J.S.A. 2C:16-1a(3)
Page 3 of 5
APPROPRIATE CATEGORY] race, color, religion, gender, handicap, sexual orientation, or ethnicity. To “intimidate” means to put another person in fear.
A person acts purposely with respect to the nature of his/her conduct or a result of his/her conduct if it is the person's conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result. A person acts purposely if he/she means to act in a certain way or to cause a certain result. A person acts purposely with respect to attendant circumstances if the person is aware of the existence of such circumstances or believes or hopes that they exist.
Purpose refers to a condition of the mind. It cannot be seen. Often, it can be determined only by inferences from conduct, words or acts. Therefore, it is not necessary for the State to produce witnesses to testify that (defendant) stated, for example, that his purpose was to intimidate the victim because of the victim’s [REPEAT CATEGORY]. It is within your power to find that proof of a state of mind has been furnished beyond a reasonable doubt by inference which may arise from the nature of the acts and the surrounding circumstances. (Defendant’s) conduct and everything done or said by him/her preceding, connected with, and immediately succeeding the commission of are among the circumstances to be considered.
In considering (defendant’s) state of mind, you may, if you wish, draw a permissive inference. If the State has presented proof that the target of the [SPECIFY OFFENSE] was selected by (defendant), or another acting in concert with (defendant), because of [CHOOSE APPROPRIATE CATEGORY] race, color, religion, gender, handicap, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, you may, if you choose to do so, infer that (defendant) acted with the purpose to intimidate an individual or a group of individuals because of [REPEAT CATEGORY] race, color, religion, gender, handicap, sexual orientation, or ethnicity.
An inference is a deduction of fact which may be drawn logically and reasonably from another fact or group of facts established by the evidence. Whether or not the inference relating to (defendant’s) state of mind should be drawn is for you to decide, using your own common sense, knowledge, and everyday experience, after you consider whether it is probable, logical, and reasonable to draw such an inference. As judge of the facts, you decide whether the facts
BIAS INTIMIDATION
[REASONABLE BELIEF OF VICTIM]
N.J.S.A. 2C:16-1a(3)
Page 4 of 5
and circumstances reflected in the evidence support any inference; you are always free to draw, or to reject, any inference.
If you decide to draw this particular inference as to the purpose of (defendant), weigh it in connection with all other evidence that you have seen and heard. Drawing an inference does not change the burden of proof imposed upon the State; the State must prove each element of each offense beyond a reasonable doubt.
[OR]
The second element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt, where the victim or the victim’s property was selected to be the target of the underlying crime because of [CHOOSE APPROPRIATE CATEGORY] the victim’s race, color, religion, gender, handicap, sexual orientation, or ethnicity. To “intimidate” means to put another person in fear.
A person acts purposely with respect to the nature of his/her conduct or a result of his/her conduct if it is the person's conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result. A person acts purposely if he/she means to act in a certain way or to cause a certain result. A person acts purposely with respect to attendant circumstances if the person is aware of the existence of such circumstances or believes or hopes that they exist.
Purpose refers to a condition of the mind. It cannot be seen. Often, it can be determined only by inferences from conduct, words or acts. Therefore, it is not necessary for the State to produce witnesses to testify that (defendant) stated, for example, that his purpose was to intimidate the victim because of the victim’s [REPEAT CATEGORY]. It is within your power to find that proof of a state of mind has been furnished beyond a reasonable doubt by inference which may arise from the nature of the acts and the surrounding circumstances. (Defendant’s) conduct and everything done or said by him/her preceding, connected with, and immediately succeeding the commission of the underlying crime are among the circumstances to be considered.
In considering (defendant’s) state of mind, you may, if you wish, draw a permissive inference. If the State has presented proof that the target of the [SPECIFY OFFENSE] was selected by (defendant), or another acting in concert with (defendant), because of [CHOOSE
BIAS INTIMIDATION
[REASONABLE BELIEF OF VICTIM]
N.J.S.A. 2C:16-1a(3)
Page 5 of 5
APPROPRIATE CATEGORY] race, color, religion, gender, handicap, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, you may, if you choose to do so, infer that (defendant) acted with the purpose to intimidate an individual or a group of individuals because of [REPEAT CATEGORY] race, color, religion, gender, handicap, sexual orientation, or ethnicity.
An inference is a deduction of fact which may be drawn logically and reasonably from another fact or group of facts established by the evidence. Whether or not the inference relating to (defendant’s) state of mind should be drawn is for you to decide, using your own common sense, knowledge, and everyday experience, after you consider whether it is probable, logical, and reasonable to draw such an inference. As judge of the facts, you decide whether the facts and circumstances reflected in the evidence support any inference; you are always free to draw, or to reject, any inference.
If you decide to draw this particular inference as to the purpose of (defendant), weigh it in connection with all other evidence that you have seen and heard. Drawing an inference does not change the burden of proof imposed upon the State; the State must prove each element of each offense beyond a reasonable doubt.
If the State has proven each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find (defendant) guilty of bias intimidation under this statute. On the other hand, if the State has failed to prove any of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find (defendant) not guilty.
