THE jury in the trial of a former SAS soldierwho denies murdering his terminally ill son was discharged yesterday after failing to reach a verdict.
Andrew Wragg, 37, was charged with murder after smothering his son, Jacob, at the family home last year.
Jacob, 10, was deaf, dumb and only able to walk on tiptoes as a result of the degenerative condition Hunter syndrome. He was not expected to live past his early teens but the trial heard that the boy was "happy, affectionate and inquisitive".
At Lewes Crown Court in Sussex yesterday, Mrs Justice Rafferty discharged the jury of nine women and three men after they had been deliberating for 11-and-a-half hours.
The judge thanked the jury for their consideration and attention during the trial, which ran for 11 days.
The Crown Prosecution Service has been given seven days to decide whether to press for a retrial.
Mr Wragg, from Worthing, was released on conditional bail, although he remains charged with murder.
After discharging the jury, the judge said: "The unwavering attention and concentration you have given has been considerable. It is very important that you leave with the thanks of the court."
Mr Wragg had admitted suffocating his son on July 24 last year in what
he claimed was a mercy killing, but he denied it was murder.
Jurors were sent out on Wednesday morning to consider their verdict over the murder charge.
When they failed to reach a unanimous decision by yesterday afternoon, Mrs Justice Rafferty told them she would accept a majority verdict on the case.
However when the foreman of the jury said they would be unlikely to reach a verdict, even if given more time, the jury was discharged.
The judge told Philip Katz, QC, prosecuting: "I'm going to give the Crown a little while to stand back and draw breath.
They have options at the moment."
A CPS spokesman said: "We are not in a position to comment further at present due to the sensitivity of the case. As soon as we know anything we will make a statement."
Even if no retrial is held over the murder charge, Mr Wragg faces
conviction for manslaughter, a charge which he has admitted.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article