BACK TO THE JURY: A COUPLE MORE NOTES TO THE COURT

Okay - sounds like there's some issues going on in the Jury Room ...

First - they are NOT being sequestered!!  The jurors went home after deliberations yesterday!
Are. You. Kidding. Me???
What is this judge thinking??  Is he hoping there will be an Appeal at the end, perhaps?
Or is he just so sure about the way the case will go, that it just doesn't matter whether the jurors are removed from OUTSIDE INFLUENCE or not.

Then - the jurors wanted to get "clarification" yesterday on the "implication" part of the Jury Instructions ... remember, this thing is well over 50 pages long, and the Jury was NOT given any sort of a copy of it .... that we know of ... 
I assume they were asking about the part where they get to individually determine if there was an underlying crime which was not spoken about, nor proved, during the trial itself ... in fact, it wasn't even mentioned until the Closing Arguments from the prosecution.

Also - the jury sent a note TODAY (note 3, by the sounds of it) asking for clarification on how to weigh evidence for these crimes.
Wait - I know, I've only heard the briefest of recaps of the instructions - but it sounded like they basically said, if YOU think ANYBODY (but specifically it seems to have menioned Cohen) has lied, in ANY part of their testimony ... you CAN - not should, it makes it a "personal choice" - you can ignore ALL of their testimony if you feel like it.
So if you think Cohen lied for some of it - you can ignore all of what he said (which collapses the case) or just parts of his testimony  or accept all of his testimony.
Same for Pecker and Stormy Daniels ... remember, there was supposed to be another woman to testify, which the prosecution dropped after Daniels' testimony (assumptions I heard was that either (a)they felt Daniels hit the spot and it would simply be redundency, (b)that the other witness was found to have an issue, or - and more likely in my mind - (c)the prosecution realized that Daniels did nothing really to move their case forward .... in fact, I believe she set it back a bit.
(Think Depp, 2nd v. Heard, 2022)

~~my computer updated while typing this, hopefully nothing has been lost during the update ~~

The tesimony they have asked to hear again, is NOT any sort of a recording of it ... it is being read aloud by a couple of members of the court ... aka, dinner theater style, basically.
My understanding is that these participants have heavy New York accents, while the original speakers do not ... also, it's going to be kind of tough, one would think, too keep things fairly monotone -- one person reads the questions asked, the other reads the answer back.
here's hoping for ACCURACY in the readings/inflections.

More on this part later on ... but not until the trial is over.

It's hard to believe that they wouldn't have had the testimony recorded for just such questions, or in case of a "mistrial" and "reprosecution" later on, just in case something happened to one of the witnesses.

Very Interesting ... remember, NY is one of the high "syndicate" areas of the US ... I would think they would have had this part straightened out waaaaaay before now.