Although the courts have sometimes recognized a value in consistency,they have nevertheless made it clear that consistency is not a paramount constitutional value in structure of the criminal justice system.The law tolerates inconsistent verdicts.22 The Supreme Court has held that if a single fact finder, whether jury or judge, returns a verdict that is internally inconsistent, the conviction may stand.23 For example, the jury may acquit a defendant of a narcotics offense, but it may convict the defendant of using the telephone to commit that offense. The conviction is inconsistent with the acquittal but will stand despite that inconsistency. Similarly, if either a single fact finder or separate fact finders acquit one defendant of a crime