Shortly after the jury began deliberations, the foreperson sent a note to the judge expressing concern that juror No. 25 “cannot follow your honor’s instructions.”
This is a “significant” development in the case because the concern is being raised so early in deliberations, according to Alan Tuerkheimer, a jury consultant and attorney not affiliated with the case.
According to the note, the foreperson also asked to speak with the judge or to have juror No. 25 interviewed, which Tuerkheimer said is the next step in the process.
“And then it’s really up to the judge to decide, ‘alright, I don’t know if this juror could continue to deliberate,’ but they’ve already started, so there’s already good grounds for any type of appeal by the defense should there be a conviction,” he added.
Tuerkheimer said this scenario is a “possible massive headache at this early stage of the game,” especially since the judge already dismissed a juror earlier this month.
Remember: Juror No. 25 is a 51-year-old male who works as a scientist and lives in Manhattan with his domestic partner. On June 16, the judge dismissed Juror No. 6 over the juror’s inconsistent disclosures about where he lives.
