Unfortunately, you were given bad information

The judge's instructions to the jury to continue deliberating is called an "Allen Charge" (Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492 [1896]). In that case the court instructed the hung jury as follows:

[i]"Members of the Jury:

I'm going to ask that you continue your deliberations in an effort to reach agreement upon a verdict and dispose of this case; and I would like for you to consider as you do so.

This is an important case. The trial has been expensive in time, effort, money and emotional strain to both the defense and the prosecution. If you should fail to agree upon a verdict, the case will be left open and may have to be tried again. Obviously, another trial would only serve to increase the cost to both sides, and there is no reason to believe that the case can be tried again by either side any better or more exhaustively than it has been tried before you.

Any future jury must be selected in the same manner and from the same source as you were chosen, and there is no reason to believe that the case could ever be submitted to twelve men and women more conscientious, more impartial, or more competent to decide it, or that more or clearer evidence could be produced.

If a substantial majority of your number are in favor of a conviction, those of you who disagree should reconsider whether your doubt is a reasonable one since it appears to make no effective impression upon the minds of the others. On the other hand, if a majority or even a lesser number of you are in favor of an acquittal, the rest of you should ask yourselves again, and most thoughtfully, whether you should accept the weight and sufficiency of evidence which fails to convince your fellow jurors beyond a reasonable doubt.

Remember at all times that no juror is expected to give up an honest belief he or she may have as to the weight or effect of the evidence; but, after full deliberation and consideration of the evidence in the case, it is your duty to agree upon a verdict if you can do so.

You must also remember that if the evidence in the case fails to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt the Defendant should have your unanimous verdict of Not Guilty.

You may be as leisurely in your deliberations as the occasion may require and should take all the time which you may feel is necessary.

I will ask now that you retire once again and continue your deliberations with these additional comments in mind to be applied, of course, in conjunction with all of the other instructions I have previously given to you."[/I]

Absent any other aggravating factors, such as the judge telling the jury it could not go home until it reached a unanimous verdict, it is highly unlikely that issue will prevail on appeal.

Sorry I couldn't bolster your hopes, but what is, is.

That’s kind of what I was thinking also PL. So I have another question which I’m sure you will know. When the Allen Charge is used and they still declare a mistrial, and say the trial was long, tedious, and costly, like many are, how likely is the state to retry it or do they just look at who was holding out and go from there? Like say only one or two or even less than half were in favor of a "not guilty" will they most likely retry? I would assume that bothe defense and the prosecution can question the jurors at that point about what worked for them and what created doubt?

__________________
"Thats it then, they will go on double, secret, probation..."

The decision to retry or not lies withthe prosecution only -- I've seen it go both ways.

A deadlocked jury is usually not questioned by either side to determine what made them disagree.