It looks like Judge Arun Subramanian just handled that issue. The judge effectively directed the jury to continue deliberations despite a note indicating that one juror was struggling to grasp his legal instructions.
In case you missed it, roughly 70 minutes into their discussions, the jury foreperson wrote to the court that one juror “cannot follow your honor’s instructions.” The note also requested that the judge intervene. In response, Judge Subramanian gave prosecutors and defense attorneys ten minutes each to propose how to address the matter.
Notably, while both sides submitted similar ideas, the government’s proposal placed a stronger emphasis on reminding jurors to adhere to the judge’s guidance on the law carefully. Subramanian noted the subtle differences between the suggestions, explaining, “Having received both parties’ proposals, I would note that in large part they are the same. The issue I have with the defense proposal is it suggests that the issue raised is not an issue of any concern and that the jury should return to deliberations.”
The judge said he would consider giving more explicit instructions about the law if confusion continues to disrupt the process. Still, for now, he advised the panel to proceed with deliberations as planned.
Diddy verdict watch continues …