It all came down to Count 5.
On nine mornings, the jurors walked into the courthouse deliberation room, and after handing over their purses and their cellphones, set about trying to reach a unanimous verdict on 42 charges against Conrad Black and three of his former colleagues.
But as they neared the end, they couldn't agree on Count 5, according to Tina Kadisak, a juror in her 30s who was interviewed yesterday. It's a count of mail fraud that accuses all the defendants of sending an inappropriate payment of $4.3-million (U.S.) from a non-compete deal with Community Newspaper Holdings Inc.
Because the 12 jurors couldn't agree on it, some other charges were left in limbo - namely the racketeering charge against Lord Black - and a tax offence, said Ms. Kadisak, a blond mother of one who lives in suburban Chicago, and who, through the course of the trial, often took notes with a feather-topped pen.
Three or four members of the jury wanted a not-guilty verdict on Count 5, she said. And so, on Tuesday, the jury sent a note to the judge saying they were deadlocked on one or more counts. They were told to go back at it, which they did, and the tension escalated.
"You get tired of being in the room," Ms. Kadisak said. "You are ready to be finished, but you're trying to be respectful.
"We just kept talking and discussing and going in circles sometimes, and made sure we were thinking about the law, not personal beliefs," she said.
They thought about going back to the judge again and saying they couldn't agree. But they decided that if they did, they would not have completed the job they had been given, she said.
By Thursday afternoon, the minority had persuaded the majority to switch their opinions from guilty to not guilty, she said. "There was nothing in particular, it was just that the evidence we had wasn't enough to say guilty beyond a reasonable doubt," she said.
While Ms. Kadisak took some heat for using the feathered pen, and some reporters made much of the jurors looking more like average people than professionals, Ms. Kadisak said, "there was not a person in that room who did not take it seriously."
She strongly disputed the notion that any of it might have been too difficult for the jurors to understand. "There were boring times," she noted, but said she learned a lot.
Some of the jurors have become friends, especially over the past two weeks, when they've been confined to their self-contained room.
"We all got along really well, and some of us became really close," Ms. Kadisak said.
After delivering their verdict, the jury decided they would rather not deal with the throng of news media microphones and cameras that had been camping out at the courthouse in recent days. They did decide, however, to allow their names to be released, after they were told that reporters might obtain them from the legal system anyway in a few months.
The jury was whisked out of the courthouse through an underground passageway and onto a prison bus that took them to their respective transit stops, Ms. Kadisak said.
It wasn't until recently that she realized how much attention was being paid to the Black case. "I had no idea I was part of something so huge," she said.
It wasn't until yesterday - when she was finally allowed to read the news accounts of the trial - that she knew the possible punishment the defendants face. With all the counts against him, the possibility exists, although some consider it remote, that Lord Black could spend the rest of his life in prison.
"Before now, I had no idea what the punishment might be," she said. "I was surprised when I read and found out what it really is."
Ms. Kadisak said she had little time for David Radler, the prosecution's star witness. Mr. Radler pleaded guilty to one charge and testified for the prosecution as part of a plea agreement. "I expected a lot more out of that testimony than I got," she said.
As for the lawyers, Ms. Kadisak liked the prosecution team but was not as fond of Edward Greenspan, a Toronto lawyer who represented Lord Black.
"I wasn't too impressed with him. He'd get kind of nasty, which I understand is his job ..." she said.
The jury of nine women and three men came from a wide variety of backgrounds. One juror, Margaret Williams, said during jury selection that her brother had been charged with a crime 10 years ago and that her husband had been the victim of identity theft. Another, Monica Prince, had worked in Canada as part of her job. Elizabeth Holsten told the judge during jury selection that someone at her work had manipulated the stock price of the company. Laura Caballero told the court her cousin was a Chicago police officer.
