for October 1954. Hylton was represented by Vivian Blake, one of the island's most prominent counsel. Blake was briefed by Hylton's solicitor, Noel Nethersole, who had been Jamaica's cricket captain in the 1930s and was a prominent West Indies Cricket Board member. It is likely that both Blake and Nethersole worked pro bono, as Hylton could not have afforded their fees. The chief prosecution counsel was Harvey DaCosta, a future West Indies Federation attorney-general, and the trial judge was Justice Colin MacGregor, later the island's Chief Justice. MacGregor had a reputation for severity, particularly towards working-class defendants. The case attracted considerable public attention, and noisy crowds gathered at the courthouse on each day of the trial, showing partiality to Hylton by cheering at each appearance of his defence team. Since it was beyond contention that Hylton had fired the fatal shots, the only conceivable defence was that of provocation, that had driven him to an act of passion. If Blake could show that Hylton was unreasonably provoked by his wife's behaviour, and had acted without premeditation, he might be convicted of manslaughter rather than capital murder. Under Blake's direction, Hylton provided the court with a vivid reconstruction of the bedroom scene in the early hours of 6 May which, the prosecution suggested, was a fabrication. However, as corroborative evidence for Hylton's version, Blake produced the letter which Hylton had tried to intercept, in which the deceased explicitly expressed her love for Francis and a hatred and contempt for her husband. The most damaging evidence against Hylton was the prosecution's revelation that Lurline's body had seven bullet wounds, meaning that at some point Hylton must have reloaded the six-shooter – this indicated calculation, rather than an act of blind rage. Hylton claimed that he reloaded intending to commit suicide, but this did not explain the number of wounds in his wife's body. In a hostile summing-up, MacGregor told the jury that Lurline's verbal abuse did not amount to sufficient provocation in law. He also dismissed the significance of the failure to caution Hylton before the arrest, and allowed his confused and self-incriminating initial statements to stand as evidence. The trial ended on 20 October 1954. The jury was initially unable to reach a verdict, but after being reminded by MacGregor of the "great public inconvenience and expense" of a delayed decision, they retired again, and returned just over an hour later