LOS ANGELES— A Los Angeles jury has failed to reach a verdict on obsdcenity charges lodged against porn producer and director Ira Isaacs, and has been dismissed from service by Judge George H. King.

According to a report on www.avn.com, on Monday one juror reportedly sent a note to Judge King charging that one of the other jurors had said that he/she did not believe in the obscenity laws—a position that caused Judge King to bring the jury back into the courtroom.

Judge King explained that no matter what the jurors’ personal feelings were about the laws themselves, it was their sworn duty to follow the law as he had given it to them in his jury charge. The jury was sent back to continue its deliberations, which lasted until 2 p.m. Monday afternoon.

The jury resumed its deliberations at 8 a.m. today. The jurors then sent another note indicating that they could not (and would not be able to) agree on a unanimous verdict on any of the charges involving the four movies that were the subject of the U.S. Department of Justice’s most recent five-count indictment: Mako’s First Time Scat, Hollywood Scat Amateurs 7 and 10, and Japanese Doggie 3 Way.

Judge King debated on the idea of bringing the jury back into the courtroom and allowing each side to take ten minutes to essentially deliver further closing arguments. Except the jury had made it clear to Judge King that further deliberations would not be fruitful.

Two of the female jurors reportedly held out. One of them basically said that her and another female juror thought that this was art, serious art, and had artistic value, and should not be found obscene.

According to the AVN report there was apparently also some question raised by the prosecution regarding whether one of the female jurors had lied when answering the questionnaire filled out by all of the prospective jurors, in response to question 33, “Are you or any member of your immediate family involved in the business of distributing or producing movies or videos?”

In fact the woman’s husband was involved in producing shock/horror type movies. But her husband is dead, and the question was asked in the present tense. The judge decided that since the question was asked in the present, she was telling the truth, because her husband died 10 years ago.

“But the fact that they [prosecutors] researched her through the public records is both chilling and saddening. To investigate a sitting juror is, to me, kind of upsetting,” Isaacs told AVN.

It is unclear where the case will go from here though Judge King set April 24 as the date for Isaacs’ third trial.