UPDATED: No Verdict Reached on First Day of Deliberations in Crockam Trial

Jurors did not return a verdict in the Jahmell Crockam murder trial after spending an afternoon deliberating. 

The jurors were brought back into the courtroom at about 4:15 p.m. Wednesday after they asked to have a portion of a cell phone engineer's testimony and the weapons charge against Crockam repeated. They then asked the court to resume their deliberations Thursday morning.

Deliberations began Wednesday afternoon after the prosecution and defense presented their closing arguments in the murder trial. 

The timeline of the events on the day that Lakewood police officer Christopher Matlosz was gunned down coupled with coroborating statements from multiple witnesses is important to proving Crockam pulled the trigger, said William J. Heisler, chief assistant Ocean County prosecutor.

"This timeline, ladies and gentlemen, is incredibly tight," Heisler told the jury in the packed room of Judge Wendel E. Daniels during his closing argument Wednesday morning. Crockam is facing murder and weapons charges for the Jan. 14, 2011, killing of Matlosz, a Manchester resident who was shot three times while on patrol.

On that day, Crockam allegedly saw Matlosz in his vehicle on August Drive just before 4 p.m., shot the officer at about 4:06 p.m., and was placing calls looking for a ride out of town at 4:07 p.m., Heisler said.

In his closing argument, defense attorney Mark Fury said that, while Crockam was in the neighborhood at the time of the shooting, that does not prove he is guilty.

"[The evidence] all boil down to one simple fact," Fury said. "He was in the neighborhood before the shooting. He left the neighborhood after."

It was Matlosz' first time working the day shift. That day, Crockam knew he had warrants out for his arrest and was carrying an illegal gun and Matlosz would have arrested the defendant, Heisler said. 

"This is how it ended. Brutally, senselessly, execution style," Heisler said. A photo of Matlosz's bullet wounds was shown. Family watching the proceedings could be heard crying. 

Cell phone records showed that calls were made by Crockam following the shooting. Heisler said that these records help to corroborate the witness statements made in court. 

"There is no evidence from the cell phones where he was at the time of the shooting," Fury said.

Fury also said that there is no gun nor blood spatter on Crockam's clothing. Though the prosecution said that he got rid of his clothes following the shooting, Fury said that he simply did not have blood on them because he was not there.

"We don't know if the gun Mr. Crockam habitually had was the one used in the shooting," Fury said. 

The case, Heisler said, is one that boils down to credibility and the corroboration of the evidence with statements made by witnesses.

But some of those witnesses may have told police lies to stay out of trouble, Fury said, since they were spoken to in pre-interviews by police that were not on the record.

Fury asked the jury to consider if the "cast of characters" who told stories of Crockam confessing to them is credible. In one instance, Crockam allegedly walked up to a fellow inmate and confessed. 

"Does that strike you as remotely likely?" Fury asked the jurors. Fury also suggested that those in jail could have fabricated their stories after hearing news reports or receiving information about Crockam from visitors. 

Many witnesses, like and a teenager whose name cannot be made public because of a court order, had no reason to lie and nothing to gain from not telling the truth, Heisler said. Further, those in jail who spoke with Crockam about the crime were "all people he trusts," Heisler said.

"Of course these are the people he's going to tell, and he couldn't keep his mouth shut," Heisler said. 

The testimony of Leonard Scalzo, one of the three eyewitnesses to the shooting, may have been inaccurate because he was frustrated with his neighborhood and wanted to "be a hero," Fury suggested.

"You know some of the things he said were not true and that calls into question all of his testimony," Fury said.

Heisler said that Scalzo "didn't ask for this. This is not Leonard Scalzo's moment in the sun."

He also suggested to the jury that the witness testimony should eliminate any reasonable doubt and the evidence as a whole leads to "an inescapable conclusion," that Matlosz was doing his job and "paid for being a good cop with his life."

Heisler asked the jurors to consider how they will feel the morning after the verdict is reached. 

"Can I look in the mirror and say 'we did the right thing?'" he questioned. 

Fury, who acknowledged that the murder of Matlosz was "a horrible case" and expressed his remorse to the family present in the courtroom, likened the trial to mining and told the jurors that it is his job to help them find the "gold" amongst the "lead."

"It's for your benefit, because when we're done, you have to sleep with your decision," he said.

The prosecution rested its case against Crockam on Tuesday. At that time, .