Mar 27, 2015 · 1 minute

Right now, Judge Kahn is asking jurors in the Kleiner vs Pao case to explain why they reached their verdict. Dan Raile is in court for Pando and is documenting those explanations. Here they are, updated as they come in live from the courtroom.

Dan's full report of the day's events will be filed later.

Kahn: "Clearly the burning question is why you did you reach the verdict you did. If you are comfortable I invite you to answer with moderation and respect."
Male juror: Based on the testimony and evidence this was one of the most difficult decisions I have ever made. It's a tough case and obviously a very public trial... Almost irrespective of the lawyers testimony ...that is why i found for Kleiner Perkins."
Male juror: "One of the things we did was review the timeline and reviewed the allegations to look for similariteies and differences in how the Junior partners were treated through the history of events, spread it all out on paper and took a long time looking at it."
Female juror (who voted in favor of Pao): "We had a lot of issues we were very close on, it was very difficult to split those issues, but given the information we had we did the best we could with four total strangers in four weeks of trial who came in with very different feelings, hammerred out the little things and the big things over and over and nit picked. It didn't go everybody's way, but we did the best we could."
Kleiner attorney Lynn Hermle: "Thank you for your service this was a very long and difficult trial... I have never seen a more attentive jury. I have literally never seen a jury more focused on the evidence."
Kahn: "Ok, you can leave through a backdoor if you wish."
Hermle: "It's pretty tough out there."