Jury in Bill Cosby case: ‘We understood we could see things again?’

Jurors in the Bill Cosby trial started deliberating early Wednesday morning to decide the fate of the comic icon. This marks their third question since entering the deliberation room.

Bill Cosby, right center, returns from a break in his sexual assault trial at the Montgomery County Courthouse, Wednesday, April 25, 2018, in Norristown, Pa. (AP Photo/Corey Perrine, Pool)

Bill Cosby jurors who will ultimately decide the fate of the comedic icon in his sexual-assault retrial began deliberating Wednesday morning. Their third question since deliberations started came just after 5:40 p.m. Wednesday evening. After court reconvened with Judge Steven O’Neill, the lawyers and the jury in the room, the judge revealed that the jurors  asked a number of questions.

Earlier today, judge overseeing Bill Cosby’s sex assault retrial has denied jurors’ requests to compare two statements — given more than a year apart — by a defense witness who claims she was there when the entertainer’s accuser concocted her story.

“Good late afternoon. I have a request and some questions from the jury and let me get to them.” Judge Steven O’Neill started.

“Are we asking the questions correctly?” Jurors asked. O’Neill told them that they are asking the questions correct, followed by “Anything you do is correct.”

“We understood we could see things again.” Jurors asked. “Yes you can,” Judge O’Neill told jurors. “The understanding is we can’t send everything back there with you.” O’Neill informed them.

“Can the jury have certain information republished so we can see it on the screen?” Jurors asked. O’Neill said they could do that for them, if they want to go over it again.

The jurors’ follow-up question related to viewing the questions and answers between Detective Reape and Bill Cosby, which Judge O’Neill said was definitely possible.

“Can the jury have certain parts of the transcript read back to us?” Jurors asked. “Absolutely,” Judge O’Neill continued. “First, it’s best to try your recollection, but if you think collectively you need portions of the transcript read back, absolutely.”

“Such as the testimony of Margo Jackson during cross-examination?” Jurors asked.

Jurors returned to the deliberation room momentarily to decide which parts they’d like read back or previewed on the screen inside the courtroom.

In their first note Wednesday, jurors asked for a legal definition of the term “consent.” They were told there wasn’t one in the state of Pennsylvania.

Last year, jurors deliberated for over 50 hours before Judge O’Neill declared a mistrial after they could not reach a unanimous decision.