Massachusetts law requires a jury to agree on every charge before a verdict can be delivered. This means that if even one juror refuses to vote the same way as the others, the entire panel must keep discussing the case until a consensus is reached or the judge decides otherwise.

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington asked Judge Sullivan to remove what he described as an apparent holdout juror, claiming another juror said the holdout was not following the law. The judge rejected the request, keeping the full jury in place.

Retired Judge Carol Erskine clarified the situation on social media, saying that “refusing to deliberate and refusing to agree are not the same thing.” She added that judges must be extremely careful not to interfere with the jurors’ private discussions.

The prolonged deadlock adds stress for both the defense and the prosecution, and it keeps the case in the news. Attorneys must wait patiently while the jurors continue to weigh the evidence, and any further delay could extend the trial even more.