NORRISTOWN, Pa. — The jury in the Bill Cosby case failed to reach a verdict on its second day of deliberations after spending 12 hours behind closed doors.
“You are conscientiously engaging in the deliberative process," Montgomery County Court Judge Steven O'Neill told the tired-looking seven men and five women who must decide if Cosby is guilty of drugging and molesting Andrea Constand in 2004.
"It is exhausting work," he added.
The jury got the case Monday night and spent four hours deliberating before retiring. When they returned Tuesday they reviewed key pieces of evidence: the testimony of the police officer who took the initial report from accuser Andrea Constand and extensive excerpts of the deposition Cosby gave in a 2005 lawsuit.
At 9:20 p.m., they told the judge they wanted to call it a night and he sent them back to their hotel 10 minutes earlier than planned.
The jurors — who are from the Pittsburgh area, 300 miles from the courthouse in suburban Philadelphia — will resume deliberations Wednesday while their hometown celebrates the Penguins' Stanley Cup victory with a parade.
"It's a worrisome cliffhanger but we are keeping the faith that justice will prevail," said Victoria Valentino, who is one of 50-plus women who have accused Cosby of sexual misconduct and who is part of a small group of accusers attending the trial.
As he left the courthouse under a dark sky, Cosby's defense lawyer, Brian McMonagle, was asked why deliberations were taking so long. "You're asking the wrong guy," he said.
Earlier, Cosby's spokesman, Andrew Wyatt, said he never thought "this was going to be a cake walk."
"I wouldn't want anything to be rushed," Wyatt said.
Wyatt also said that when the jury's decision is announced, Cosby's wife of 53 years may not be by his side.
"She doesn't need to be here for the verdict," he said of Camille Cosby, who made an appearance during closing arguments on Monday but has not been back to the courthouse.
"Mrs. Cosby came through yesterday and showed her support," Wyatt said.
"Look, the infidelity in the marriage was addressed many, many years ago," he added. "They've moved on, they've worked through those problems."
A day earlier, Cosby's defense team addressed his infidelities head-on, his lead counsel looking at Camille and thundering, "She deserved better!"
The moment played into the defense contention that the 2004 encounter at the center of the trial was the result of an extramarital affair. Constand says there was no romantic relationship and that Cosby gave her pills that incapacitated her and then assaulted her.
As jurors weighed the dueling accounts, they requested several crucial pieces of evidence.
They first wanted to see a section of the deposition in which Cosby talked about giving Constand some Benadryl and called the pills "your friends." Then they asked for a much larger batch of testimony, covering more of Cosby's account of the 2004 encounter.
Those requests would "generally be interpreted as pro-prosecution," said Dennis McAndrews, a former prosecutor who has been attending the trial, cautioning that it's impossible to know what the jurors are actually thinking at this point.
Later in the morning, the jury asked the judge for a definition of the phrase "without her knowledge" in the count that accuses Cosby of giving Constand an intoxicant before molesting her. The judge said he could not provide a definition.
"Generally, when asking for a definition of a crime, there are a couple of jurors struggling to fit the facts into the specific definition," McAndrews said.
In the late afternoon, the jurors sent out a request to review the testimony of the police officer who interviewed Constand in 2005. Her account contained discrepancies that the defense seized on throughout the trial.
She said the incident happened in March after dinner with friends, while in later accounts she said that it was actually January and there had been no dinner. She also told police she had never been alone with Cosby before and that their contact after the alleged assault was "rare and brief."
McAndrews said the request could be read two ways: the jury could be examining her narrative of what Cosby did to her, which has remained constant through all her accounts, or they could be zeroing in on the inconsistencies.
After prosecutors declined to charge Cosby in 2005, Constand sued him and settled out of court for an undisclosed sum. The deposition he gave did not become public until 2015 when a judge unsealed it as dozens of women came forward to accuse him of sexual misconduct — allegations he denies. Prosecutors said the contents of the deposition led them to reopen the investigation and charge Cosby.
At midday on Tuesday, Wyatt went before the TV cameras and complained that the comedian had not received an impartial trial — handing out a letter he said was from a woman who was not allowed to testify as a defense witness.
The letter stated that Constand told the woman more than a decade ago that she could file false sexual assault charges against an unnamed high-profile figure and sue them. The judge did not allow it into the trial because it’s hearsay.
“I think this court has not given Cosby a fair and impartial trial,” Wyatt said.
The woman, whose name was on the letter, did not respond to a request for comment and NBC News was not able to verify its authenticity.
Constand's lawyer called Wyatt's public-relations move "outrageous."
"It's absolutely not true," attorney Dolores Troiani said. "There seems to be no purpose in him doing this except to slander her."
Cosby has pleaded not guilty to three counts of aggravated indecent assault, a charge that carries up to 10 years in prison. Prosecutors have said if he's convicted, they will ask the judge to jail him immediately, arguing he's a flight risk, but legal experts say that's a long shot.