sign of a verdict. at least not yet pictures to liberate for a third or second i should say in new york versus trump trial. focusing on testimony from trump's former fixer michael collen and former publisher david pecker. where all this heading? we have guests to weigh in on it right now. welcome everybody i'm neil cavuto. let's get right to it, nate foy i should say here's what is interesting about this, it could go for another couple of hours but it could also wrap up and a half an hour character we know? >> well kneel the jury could decide to stay as late as 6:00 pm eastern tonight and we're just waiting for more updates, so far they've gone over 3 notes the jury has requested so far today in court just in the past 20 minutes former president donald trump is criticizing the judge and jury instructions specifically on true social call them unconstitutional and unfair. the 3 notes that have gone over today so far included revisiting testimony from michael cohen and david packer as well as what the jury can infer from facts presented at the trial pack and then the judge just revisited, reread 29 pages of the jury instructions. as part of those instructions, a big part has to do with michael collins testimony is specifically. remember he is the only person directly connecting former president donald trump to the stormy daniels deal. but cohen is considered an accomplice in this trial. the instructions read a defendant may not be convicted of any crime upon the testimony of an accomplice unless it's supported by corroborative evidence. so that means sword alone is not enough to convict trump. the jury also went over there are 3 options for the underlying crime trump is accused of. the jury can pick between a federal election campaign act violation, falsification of other business records, or a tax law violation which is something trump criticized today incorporate listen here. >> it's called victim. pick him and you have to be unanimous. just a couple votes. >> so again neil the jury can decide to stay late if they're inching closer to a verdict that we've no indication that is the case right now, so we're just waiting for another update and perhaps another question but a judge. will let you know if we get anything else. back to you. >> thank you for that nate. we've got tom to preback with us and mercedes cohen, welcome. tom to you first, what do we read 11 hours into jury deliberations and how it's going? >> this tree seems to have gone down to business quickly neil. 3 hours into deliberations specific requests to have certain portions of the testimony back. interestingly they were focused on events that occurred at the beginning of the timeline, so to speak, david packer's testimony and the like are they also asked the jury instructions to be read back which to me is for punishment that's not a short endeavor it takes about an hour to read those instructions. is curious neil under new york law typically jury instructions are not actually handed over physically to the jury in their deliberations, they are read out loud by the judge and that is it. unless you're paying attention for the full hour and these are exceedingly complex instructions it's totally understandable the jurors cannot remember what these instructions were needed to have them read back. so the jury's clearly taking its duties seriously, its dove into the evidence and my guess is we will not get a verdict today possibly tomorrow. >> neil: you know mercedes a lot of people read in to the type of information jurors were originally asking for dating back to the pecker testimony and obviously what we heard out of michael cohen. surmising they are going earliest first and sequentially. that may have been only 2 for because they haven't gone for their witnesses down the road. so what to make of that? >> certainly i am sure the defense is a little concerned that they're looking at david packer's testimony. he was very clear about the conversations that he had about these catching co and having conversations about stories that needed to be suppressed. some stories that should have been highlighted to really help donald trump out in the campaign. it was something similar to some of the concerns the defense have had but they try to deflect by focusing so aggressively on michael corn. by the way it is great, michael cohen is the prosecution's achilles heel. the more you focus on whether or not you can nest the case on michael cohen, the judge already said you can't do so, you have to further corroboration, the other carp -- corroboration could be entry pecker who is clear about what the purpose was behind paying off these types of stories to help in the former president terms campaign. >> tom packwood and that he read as an advantage to the prosecution? >> has. i think it could be read as an advantage to the prosecution but i thank the thing that's important to keep in mind here is these jury requests don't necessarily reflect what the major -- majority of jurors are interested in our thinking are sometimes even have these types of requests emanate from a single juror who says, you know, when a minute i dormer exacted what pecker said i think it's important i'd like to have it heard back and then they go and request the judge read it back. so i wouldn't be so quick as to say because the jury is interested in this that means most of the jurors or, for all we know there could just be 1 iconic -- iconoclastic juror who was to hear it back. >> neil: let me switch gears to what's going on in this courthouse and i guess everyone has to stick pretty close together not be in the same room i don't know what room the president is in versus the prosecution or the defense team but they are all supposed to be relatively close together in the event the jurors make a decision i guess. or they want to be called back into the courtroom to be heard evidence or what howdy. is not unusual to this case? the case of a former president who lives in the city and has a home in the city relatively nearby but he has to lasted out with everyone. >> honestly knew they are bound by the judge's instructions and i'm certain the judge has instructed the parties to stay close especially because at a moments notice they have discouraged quickly into the courtroom and listen to whether there is a verdict, whether they're having trouble or want instructions reread to them, there are so many things that can happen it's not unusual for the parties to be directed to stay close buy because thanks are going to come and go. certainly this has been such an unpredictable case stay by day. that's why i'm certain the judge has require the parties to stay vary close in case there are any questions the jury may have been on an egg in you both touched on the powerful weekend approaching and how maybe it puts an extra pep in your step trying to get it wrapped up but couldn't it work around the other way atomically and you're in the middle of being 1 of the most iconic and important hi story legal cases in american history, would you want it to end? just to rush out of barbecue? out i don't want to say milk it for all its work but you are in the middle of history here why rush it? >> feel free to use that term neil there are instances where jurors are self extending their service and what is necessary precisely because they like to be in the limelight and they like to get the cork paid for lunches and dinners and that sort of thing. but luck i think my extremes at least there is truth to the idea when you have a weekend coming up or holiday coming up there is a bit of hydraulic pressure on the jury to decide until he, emotionally i am sure there are at least some jurors thinking we're going to get this thing wrapped by friday so we can go home to our families and have it done for the can. not to say they're going to force a decision or reach an outcome after not 100% certain it's the right outcome but oftentimes in these group deliberations there is a general consensus that if we can reach a decision by 5:00 friday let's do everything we can to make that decision. >> neil: and sometimes there is no reading a share number of charges against someone versus how long the jury could deliver a peer i know it's 11 hours we're talking about right now and it's roughly the same amount of time back in 1987 jurors were deliberating over the fate he as partners were facing dozens of counts as it turns out all of them were exonerated on all charges. only reason i mention it mercedes is it took 21 days and hours to come to that with almost as many charges or counts against him as against donald trump. donald trump has more as a single individual but sometimes we are surprised because arrogant to that and i mention that yesterday because the overwhelming consensus at the time in 87 was that donovan was going to live the rest of his life in jail. that was the overwhelming sentiment, the press that followed it. than they had this decision that exonerated all of them. so, sometimes we can get the wrong idea right? >> so, what we could have surmised if it had been a quick turnaround by the jury once we went to the deliberation room 1 of 2 things, unanimous to convict, unanimous to summary. if it's a quick turnaround but we are talking about 5 and have weak trial pack multiple witnesses, tons of documents, they are going through it piece by piece because there are 34 counts being called to question. and at the end of the day they are doing the appropriate due diligence. this is a serious case and they need to do the appropriate due diligence to come to the right resolution. when you talk about this type of pressure, the other thing that really complicates things is that in state court you don't get jurisdictions. the jury gets jury instructions here for your federal cases they do, state cases they don't. in new york it's the most frustrating thing. also delays to liberations as you can see the jury asked multiple times for the instructions to be read back to them. it's a frustrating process. hopefully they will change it at some point and let the jurors have the jury instructions to see thanks along. >> neil: and just to be clear of tom haack in order to get a guilty verdict the jury must be unanimous on each and every count they apply the 2 right? >> rate peer the jury has to reach unanimity and that's not to say they cannot split. there could be some counts where they put in some debate convict. >> neil: anything guilty that was my quote not yours it's got to be unanimous. >> yes. spilling all right think you got so much i appreciate that. so were waiting to hear from a former president, you might address the press coming out of that building he is in there as we speak. don't know for sure how much longer this will go on it could be up to 6:00 pm, about 1 hour and 50 minutes or so. we don't know if that's the plan peer it looks like donald trump is coming out he might address reporters. let's listen. now he's going right back and. again, we are keeping track on that. also keeping track on what he might say afterwards. also waited to hear that joe biden whenever this is resolved plans to adjust the nation. immediately prompted a question donald trump is fully exonerated not found guilty of anything we'll he still address the nation? we will explore that after this (bell ringing) someone needs to customize and save hundreds with liberty mutual! (inaudible sounds) (elevator doors opening) wait, there's an elevator? only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, ♪ ♪ liberty. ♪ there are many ways to do things. at old dominion freight line, we do them this way. this way has people who start early. people who care and inspire each other to do things the way they should be done. this way uses technology (♪) and goes the extra mile (♪) to deliver your promises on-time, every time. this way is why we're the number one national ltl carrier for quality. for us, this way is the right way which is why it's the only way we go. alright we are just learning now the jury is to be excused at 4:30 pm. 14 minutes from now. it's a little earlier than it could have been. the judge said they could've stayed until 6:00 pm peer have a pretty good idea rebecca joins us now, i didn't want to overread into that. they could've stayed until 6, they are breaking up at 430. what do you think we. >> to me it means they are not that close to it decision. so the judges asking would you like to go to 60 need the extra time in the jury said no, we would rather just go home back rest a bit and go back tomorrow. they must be in the middle overview and the documents rather than close to the and and post to a verdict. i think that could be very good for the former president. i thank the jury seems as if they really doing their due diligence in reviewing documents and going over some of the testimony they heard in the beginning of the case because it's been a long trial, maybe they forgot. there could be some people that are disagreeing, that's okay too. let's just hope that at the end the jury does conclude that this multiple criminal verdict sheet that is really very confusing to me as unconstitutional, violates the former presidents 6 amendment rights. on hoping they conclude that there is no evidence with which to find donald trump guilty. >> neil: but you also debate than might not be in sync on this. back to be another reason to say lesko a day we'll have a third day of deliberations tomorrow. could that be in play? >> sure. you never really know when a jury asks for some feedback or some read back. you don't know if they just want to confirm what they were thinking or that there are 2 sides or 1 possible outlier whose disagreeing peer if there's a disagreement or those a confirmation of what they were all thinking before they went into that verdict grim. you don't really know we try to just say we hope the jury is going to do the right thing here and see that there is really no evidence with which to convict the former president. >> neil: alright because a good time to the attorney earlier today who said the line of questioning back the concern with packer did seem to indicate this ultimate meeting at trump tower that would be deemed friendly. his opinion only to the prosecution. you don't concur? >> i don't know that we can make those assumptions. it could be 1 person whose pro prosecution and we can have 11 a part of fence or we have the complete opposite. we could also just to have some of the jurors saying i'm not sure yet what happens here and i just hear this back. i don't fully remember. >> neil: alright. >> it's a long trial. there's been a lot of also station of what is a legend evidence. it confuses people peer it confuses up and were on the outside looking in imagine sitting there all day. sitting in an unfamiliar place its very intimidating. i'm hoping that the jury is really looking to do the right thing and go through the evidence vary methodically. >> neil: alright well if you're confused rebecca and your top-notch lawyer then i feel perfectly at home being the normal space cadet i am. so rebecca think you will see what this means and whether they can regroup tomorrow and whether it decision is reached on any of this before the weekend. we just don't know. in the meantime we do know president trump -- former president is in that building. the only assume we have from him a few minutes ago was this pair take a look. >> i want to campaign. >> neil: donald trump saying he was to campaign. he is not able to do that as long as the jury deliberates here so he has to wait to this the whole time. former u.s. defense secretary white house chief of staff former cia director leon good to have you. we wait to hear what the former president trump has to say daily reflections on this every time he is at the courthouse but were also told president biden will say something about this once the jury makes it's decision. dew you think that's a wise idea for joe biden to assert himself in this? >> frankly i thank the better approach is to not speculate at all. this issue is in the hands of the jury right now and i think we ought to allow the jury to make its final decision. with regards to commentary afterwards, you know, i think again for president of the united states is probably better. on not to comment on jury verdicts, that's usually the approach presidents take, to basically say the judicial system has worked, the jury has arrived at a verdict back that up holes or system of justice in this country and leave it at that. because if you engage in commentary on it that i think particularly if he is convicted it will look like the president is gloating. i thank the president was elected frankly to bring some calm and dignity to the oval office and not engage in that kind of commentary. >> neil: it could be just as curious if done much of his completely exonerated and not found guilty of anything. with the president then say the system works and tip his hat to his predecessor? >> i think juries make all kinds of verdicts in this country, that's the nature of our judicial system. and i think whether you like it or not the verdict frankly is up to the jury 1 way or the other. >> neil: so that's her lawyerly way of answer does not answer my question peer bloc quebecois. >> i'm not somebody who enjoys commenting or speculating about what the jury is going to do. >> neil: no calculate. to be clear president biden was to come in on this or make and adjust to the nation i think it was billed as that adjust to the nation after the jury verdict is reached i don't know if that's a good idea either way. i guess that's what i was try to ask you. >> and what i'm saying is i thank the better approach is not to comment with regards to the jury for duke. 1 way or the other. the jury has reached it's decision, you have to respect that decision whatever it is. you want they are, the jury was there, they heard the facts, they made a decision. and think we have to accept that as part of the jury process. but i think it's better for the president at this point to not have to comment 1 way or the other. the public will make up its own mind as to what happened in this case and will decide what impact it has in november. i think it's better left to the american people to decide what is the consequence of this trial. >> neil: got it. you know, 1 of the things that comes up with this is been talked about the american people will decide that ultimately, we do know donald trump remains a slight favorite over joe biden. if this has hurt and it has a funny way showing it. i think his numbers were -- are stronger that when it started weeks ago. does that surprise you? >> you know, i think we've seen that there are obviously a backlash pack every action to the trials that know only going on but the trials that are supposed to go on in the future as well and that president trump has done a pretty good job of attacking this system and showing himself to be a martyr. i understand that approach and i think it has had some impact particularly with his political base. >> neil: but it's more than his buttock obeys. nearly recent invention and is joe biden you would think would be benefiting more from all of this but he is not khakis losing key demographic groups 1 after another. that could change it is still early as you reminded me, but almost anyone else would be performing better you would think in this environment then joe biden. are you worried for some members in your party of expressed frustration hacked her at the prospect he could easily be defeated and maybe even walloped in november. what do you think we. >> well neil i'm the kind of individual bat thinks there's a long time between now and the election and almost anything can happen between now and the election. i wouldn't put anything in the bank right now. 1 way or the other. obviously if the pre