“I think, all told, they’ve had about a day and a half,” she said.

The judge told jurors as much before dismissing them for the day on Tuesday, instructing them that the equivalent of two days of deliberations in a complex corruption case was “not unreasonable and it’s not excessive.”

But jurors’ notes indicated a level of frustration verging on despair, with three asking to be dismissed from jury service.

“I physically and emotionally cannot do this anymore,” one juror’s note said. “I completely respect this process and this court but need to have my life back.”

“We have some very fundamental differences, and nobody wants to compromise our own beliefs,” another juror wrote. “I regret to say I can no longer continue after today.”

Another note read, “I feel there is nothing else I can offer to this process.”

That frustration — coupled with a pending snowstorm Wednesday, which led the judge to postpone the trial until Thursday — seemed to signal a trial veering dangerously close to disarray. Prosecutors and defense lawyers proposed a cornucopia of possible solutions, ranging from finishing the trial with just 11 jurors to replacing a current juror with an alternate — a move that would require the newly constituted 12-member jury to restart deliberations entirely.

A defense lawyer, Stephen Coffey, dismissed that suggestion. “You’re going to have a revolt,” he said.

Judge Caproni denied the three jurors’ requests to be dismissed, telling them that while she was “incredibly sympathetic” to the burdens of jury duty, the prosecutors and the defendants were entitled to the jurors’ best efforts. At least one juror seemed to shake her head as the judge told the panel to return on Thursday.