The jury in the trial of Dublin man Joe O'Reilly for murder of his wife Rachel has been sent to a hotel for the night after failing to reach a verdict.
Mr O'Reilly (35), of Lambay View, Baldarragh, the Naul, Co Dublin, has pleaded not guilty to murdering his wife and mother of two, Rachel O'Reilly (30), at the family home on October 4th, 2004.
Mr Justice Barry White retired the jury to a hotel just after 7:15pm this evening telling them they must cease all deliberations.
The judge began his charge to the jury shortly after 11.20am today and took them day by day through the evidence in the case. He rose shortly before 1pm for lunch and returned at about 2.15 to finish summing up. He then sent the jury out to consider its verdict just after 3pm.
Within 14 minutes of the jury retiring, they knocked on the door of the jury room twice, once to ask for a flip chart and markers.
Shortly before 6pm they came back and asked for a transcript of Derek Quearney's evidence, Mr O'Reilly's alibi witness and co-worker. However, Mr Justice White said he could not give them a transcript and re-read the evidence to them.
The jury also asked that the evidence of Garda Jim McGovern, who drove the route from the O'Reilly family home to Broadstone bus depot in Phibsborough be read back to them.
After reading the two pieces of evidence Mr Justice White sent them back to consider their verdict at 6:30 before saying he would leave them until 7pm or 7:15pm when "if there's no sign of matters happening I will retire them for the night".
At 7.15pm, the judge returned to court and asked that the jury be brought back in.
After their four hours of deliberations, excluding a smoking break, he told them that it had been a long day involving a lot of concentration for them.
"I will ask you to formally cease your deliberations."
"And when I say cease your deliberations, I mean it," the judge added.
He said he did not know how many times he had retired juries for the night and they had come in the next day with a series of questions. It was clear that whatever they had been doing the night before, they had not relaxed their minds from the issues of the day, the judge said.
I am like the Pope in matters of faith - infallible as far as you are concerned [in matters of law]
Mr Justice Barry White
Mr Justice Barry White
Earlier, in his charge to the jury Mr Justice White told the nine men and two women they must first decide, based on the evidence before them, whether Mrs O'Reilly was unlawfully killed. Thereafter, they must decide who killed her.
He told jury members they must take directions on the law from him and must then begin deliberating with "an air of disbelief" about the accusations about Mr O'Reilly. He said the onus is on the State to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
"I am like the Pope in matters of faith - infallible as far as you are concerned [in matters of law]," he said.
Mr Justice White said there was no direct evidence in relation to Mrs O'Reilly's death and that the State must therefore rely on circumstantial evidence. In great detail, the judge explained the difference between "direct evidence" and "circumstantial evidence".
He said that what might satisfy one person in terms of proof beyond a reasonable doubt may not satisfy another. "Proof beyond reasonable doubt is a matter for the individual conscience of each member of a jury," he said.
The judge said that each member of the jury must, for the State to have convinced them of Mr O'Reilly's guilt, be satisfied to be convicted on the basis of the same evidence themselves if in his position.
"But if you say 'well no, I would not be happy to be convicted on that evidence, I would not feel I had got justice' then the State have failed to satisfy you as to the guilt of the accused man," the judge said.
He said that where the evidence had two interpretations, the one favourable to the accused must be the one they took.
"If there is a doubt, you must give the benefit of the doubt to the accused man," he said.
Mr O'Reilly took his seat at about 10.40am on the bench to the judge's right, along the side of court number two in the Four Courts in Dublin.
He spoke with members of his legal team and appeared to check for messages on his mobile phone.
The jury was seated along the wall on the opposite side of the court. Some members took notes during the judge's lengthy summing up.
The family of Rachel O'Reilly, including her mother Rose Callaly, were seated together on a bench at the back of the court facing the judge. Members of the O'Reilly family, including Joe O'Reilly's mother Ann, sat further back.
The court was packed with members of the public, dozens of journalists and gardaí from the Balbriggan area who worked on the case.
Members of the public chatting at the back of the court had begun to speculate on the outcome of the case and to solicit the opinions of others around them even before the judge took the bench to charge the jury at about 2.15pm.
Today is the 20th day of the trial. Yesterday, the jury heard closing submissions from the defence and prosecution.
In his closing speech, defence counsel Mr Patrick Gageby SC warned the jury against being swayed by media attention to the case.
Mr Gageby urged the jury not to court popularity by finding Mr O'Reilly guilty. He said he wasn't going to try to convince them Mr O'Reilly was innocent but said all he had to do was to "satisfy" them that a reasonable doubt existed.
Prosecution counsel Dominic McGinn told the jury that the only person with a motive to kill Mrs O'Reilly was her husband. He told the jury there was "only one inescapable conclusion" to the case.