The jury is asking the court about clarification about Manslaughter

[MrScorpio]

Apparently, some of jury is grappling with that consideration

[woolldog]

1. HLN jumping to the conclusion that that means the jury is no longer considering murder.

I don't think that's necessarily the case. Too many unknowns, esp w/ respect to how this jury is operating. They could simply have decided that self defense is not applicable and are trying to decide whether it should be murder or manslaughter.

[YarnAddict]

2. All the talking heads

have a different interpretation of what this means.

[Ruby the Liberal]

4. It could even mean that some want to acquit

and need verbiage clarification on those who don't.

No way of telling.

[woolldog]

6. yes, it could be. nt

[avebury]

3. 30 minute recess so that both sides can decide what to tell the

jury. Why can't the Judge just answer the question?

[Ruby the Liberal]

5. Same reason they hammered out the jury instructions as a team of 3.

Judge, defense and prosecution. That way no one has a claim to "rogue judge" appeals.

[avebury]

8. Somebody on the scene reported on HLN that Omara looked concerned and

Bernie DLR and John Guy were looking a little more confident. It will be interesting. It comes down to what it is the jury wants clarified.

One of the talking heads did say that this jury does appear to be one that is willing to come to a decision.

[Just Saying]

7. They already have the laws in writing, legal definitions and instructions.

Anything else they tell them may sway their decision so they have to decide what, if anything, they can say.

When I served on a jury and we asked questions we were told (twice, I believe) that we had to work with the information we had to reach a verdict. That could happen here too.