so the idea of sequestering juries during covid is way down the line. first we have to decide are we even going to keep this jury here going forward. all right. so much to the question of what s taking so long, you know, as was just laid out so well by ron, this is a complicated case, there s a lot of different counts, there s a lot for the jury to go over. but is that what s happening here? could it be something else? do you think that it could be some disagreement? give us an idea of what about this case could be impacting the length of deliberations inside that jury room right now, danny. there was a public perception about this case early on. the thinking went, well, jeffrey epstein was the devil incarnate. there, anyone associated with him must have some culpability. that may be a correct moral statement but it doesn t necessarily mean someone associated with epstein violated federal law as alleged in the indictment.
down. joining me legal analyst, kendall coffey. we should mention, george zimmerman, has sued nbc university, the parent company of this network for defamation. is it a surprise the jury will be sequestered once they are seated? i didn t think it was likely. sequestering juries is rare unless you get into the deliberations. as this judge was hearing from the jurors, she made a conclusion with the extent of media exposure, she wisely decided in view of everything that s happened in the past four days, that there should be an order of sequestering the juries. it is a big, personal hardship for the jurors. it is a public expense. it is one thing that can be done to increase the likelihood of a fair trial. to your point, some of the questioning today, one woman, a jury identified as g-29, discussing how she heard about the case itself, which happened