A JURY asked a judge to define the word "sure" before failing to reach a verdict in a teenage stabbing trial.
Judge John Burgess looked stunned after reading a note from the jury that said: "Can we have a specific definition of 'Am I sure'. How sure do we have to be?"
The judge, sitting at Derby Crown Court, told them: "Sure is a perfectly ordinary English word. I can't define it more specifically than that."
The accused, who is 16, was alleged to have stabbed a 15-year-old boy twice during an attack in February last year outside a Derby school.
The jury was told that he and five other youths surrounded the boy before punching and kicking him.
After discussing the case for nearly seven hours, the jury failed to reach a verdict on whether the teenager was guilty of wounding with intent.
The jury was subsequently discharged and a new trial ordered.
Sarah Munro, prosecuting, told the court: "I have had clear instructions from the Crown Prosecution Service for a retrial."
The new trial is expected to take place in September. Miss Munro said it would be difficult to hold the trial before then because several witnesses are young and will be taking exams and then going on holiday.
Before the trial, the defendant pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of violent disorder in relation to the incident. However, the Crown Prosecution Service decided there was sufficient evidence to charge him with wounding with intent.
Five other youths also pleaded guilty to violent disorder. They faced no further charges and Judge Burgess said he would sentence them before the second trial.
He granted bail to the defendant, who was 15 at the time of the incident. He must not contact several other young people involved in the case.
None of the teenagers can be named because of their ages. The school also cannot be identified.
The court had been told the injured 15-year-old victim was surrounded by a gang. He was allegedly punched and kicked before being stabbed.
