Guam Jury Instruction — 3 Credibility Of Witnesses is a legal guideline provided to jurors in Guam to help them evaluate and determine the credibility of witnesses during a trial. This instruction provides important information regarding the factors that should be considered when assessing the reliability and trustworthiness of witness testimonies. The credibility of witnesses plays a crucial role in the justice system as it directly influences the weight given to their statements and testimony. The Guam Jury Instruction — 3 Credibility Of Witnesses aims to assist jurors in making informed decisions by providing key aspects to examine when evaluating witness credibility. Keywords: Guam, Jury Instruction, Credibility of Witnesses, legal guideline, jurors, evaluation, reliability, trustworthiness, testimonies, justice system. Different types of Guam Jury Instructions — 3 Credibility Of Witnesses may include: 1. Guam Jury Instruction — 3.01 Credibility Factors: This type of instruction outlines specific factors that jurors should consider when determining the credibility of witnesses. It may include elements such as the witness's demeanor, consistency in their testimony, prior criminal convictions, bias or interest in the outcome, and any potential motivations to provide false information. 2. Guam Jury Instruction — 3.02 Expert Witness Credibility: This instruction focuses specifically on the credibility assessment of expert witnesses. It addresses the qualifications, experience, and methodology used by the expert in forming their opinion. It also emphasizes the importance of weighing expert testimony against the evidence presented in the case. 3. Guam Jury Instruction — 3.03 Credibility Challenges: This type of instruction informs jurors about ways in which the credibility of witnesses can be challenged. It could include strategies like cross-examination, presenting contradictory evidence, or highlighting inconsistencies in a witness's statements or behavior. Keywords: credibility factors, expert witness credibility, qualifications, experience, methodology, expert testimony, evidence, credibility challenges, cross-examination, contradictory evidence, inconsistencies.