Can post-crime conduct be considered only to support a finding of guilt?

The instructions did not inform the jury all of defendant's postcrime conduct could be considered only to support a finding of guilt. Rather, the above instructions, by their terms, applied only to statements the jury found were false or misleading, or to evidence defendant tried to obtain false testimony or create false evidence. Thus, the instructions simply informed the jury that certain types of conduct may demonstrate an awareness of defendant's guilt and precludes the jury from determining guilt based solely on that evidence. As such, "the instruction is favorable to the defense, because it precludes a jury from convicting a defendant based solely upon his or her dishonest statements relating to the crimes." (People v. Page (2008) 44 Cal.4th 1, 51.) The express terms of the instructions require the jury to first determine whether the conduct occurred. If the jury concludes the evidence demonstrates cooperation and truthful statements, the jury has no reason to apply the instructions at all.