(NewsNation) — The jury in the manslaughter trial of Jennifer Crumbley, the mother of the Oxford High School shooter, faced a challenging day of deliberations, failing to reach a verdict after seven hours of consideration.

Crumbley, the first parent in the United States to be charged for a mass shooting committed by her child, is accused of involuntary manslaughter for the shooting that claimed the lives of four students. The jury, during their deliberations, raised questions seeking clarification on critical aspects of the case.

Jesse Weber, NewsNation’s legal contributor, commented on the jury’s questions, stating that their inquiries indicate a thoughtful consideration of the complex legal theories involved. He acknowledged the difficulty in proving Crumbley’s guilt and said that a hung jury or even an acquittal could be a plausible outcome.

One query centered around the possibility of inferring information from evidence or witnesses not presented by the prosecution. Specifically, the jury sought to understand whether they could consider factors such as how the shooter acquired the gun, given that he refused to testify. However, the judge intervened to remind the jury to base their decision solely on the evidence presented during the trial.

“Make your decision only on the evidence that I let in and nothing else. Your decision should be based on all the evidence regardless of which party produced it,” the judge instructed.

Another question from the jury aimed to clarify the two legal theories under which Crumbley could be convicted of involuntary manslaughter. Prosecutors must prove that she caused the deaths and that it was reasonably foreseeable that her son would commit such an act.

Prosecutors argue that the case is unique and rests on egregious facts, claiming that Crumbley has been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense, however, contends that she had no knowledge of the severity of her son’s situation.

The prosecution points to the parents buying the gun for their son, who had shown signs of distress, and an incident at school where the parents were called in after their son drew a troubling image. Despite these warning signs, the defense argues that Crumbley could not have foreseen the tragic outcome.

Deliberations are set to continue Tuesday.