Malka Leifer verdict so far eluding jury
The jury retired last Wednesday to deliberate on a verdict; Leifer, 56, faces 27 charges relating to sexual abuse
The jury in the Malka Leifer trial today (Tuesday) sent two separate questions to Judge Mark Gamble relating to a state of deadlock in their deliberations.
The jury indicated it is at the present stage of its deliberations not in a position to return a unanimous verdict on all charges relating to the former Adass School principal.
Leifer, 56, faces 27 charges relating to sexual abuse, including 10 counts of rape, over events that allegedly occurred at the school between 2003 and 2007, involving sisters Elly Sapper, Nicole Meyer and Dassi Erlich.
The jury retired last Wednesday to deliberate on a verdict. The 12 jurors were selected by ballot from a jury of 15 which had listened to evidence from Crown prosecutor Justin Lewis and Leifer’s defence barrister Ian Hill over the past seven weeks.
The jurors were called back into court twice today. Their first question to Judge Gamble was whether a majority verdict would be acceptable, as they were unable to find unanimous agreement among jurors on all the charges facing Leifer.
Seated in court, jurors were told by the judge, “Although I have the power to dismiss you without a verdict having been reached. I should only do this if I’m satisfied that you will not be able to agree on a verdict. Even if you are given more time for discussion. I am not yet satisfied that this is the case.
“What I urge you to do is to return to the jury room and try to resolve your differences. Experience has shown that juries can often agree if given more time to consider and discuss issues,” the judge advised.
“That is an important responsibility. You must fulfil it to the best of your ability.”
Judge Gamble told jurors they have “a duty to listen carefully and with an open mind to the views of every other juror” and “calmly weigh up each other’s opinions about the evidence and test them by discussion”.
But he strongly cautioned jurors not to “change your mind simply to reach a unanimous verdict”.
Hours later, the jury sent a second note to the judge. With the jury ushered into court and the three complainants sitting in court, the foreperson asked if it is acceptable that jurors be unanimous on some charges and hung on others.
Judge Gamble responded by asking if the jury had in fact reached a unanimous verdict on some of the charges, to which the foreperson responded, “Yes.”
The judge then asked if there was a “realistic chance” that with more time they could reach unanimity on the remaining charges, to which the foreperson responded, “Yes, your honour.”
The jury was sent home and will resume deliberations tomorrow morning.
The trial continues.
comments