NEW YORK (AP) — A jury returns to deliberate for a second day Tuesday at the sex trafficking trial of music mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs.

On Monday, jurors deliberated over five hours without reaching a verdict after receiving instructions on the law from the trial judge, Arun Subramanian.

They are deciding whether prosecutors have proven racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking charges during a trial that began in early May.

Prosecutors say Combs for two decades used his fame, fortune and a roster of employees and associates to help him coerce and force two different girlfriends to repeatedly perform sexually with male sex workers for days at a time while he watched and sometimes filmed the drug-fueled events.

Defense lawyers say prosecutors are unjustly basing federal crimes on what Combs did in the bedroom with his girlfriends as they participated in the swinger lifestyle and on acts of domestic violence involving their client.

Combs, 55, could face 15 years in prison to life behind bars if he is convicted of all charges.

After pleading not guilty, Combs chose not to testify as his lawyers built their arguments for acquittal mostly through lengthy cross examinations of dozens of witnesses called by prosecutors, including some of Combs’ former employees who took the witness stand reluctantly only after being granted immunity.

When jurors first left the room to begin deliberating on Monday, Combs sat for a while slumped in his chair at the defense table before standing and turning toward three rows of spectators packed with his family and friends.

Those supporters held hands and lowered their heads in prayer, as did Combs, who was several feet from them in the well of the courtroom. After they finished, they together applauded, and so did Combs, still clapping as he turned back toward the front of the room.

Combs also showed off two books he’s reading: “The Power of Positive Thinking” by Norman Vincent Peale and “The Happiness Advantage” by Shawn Achor.

Barely an hour into deliberations, the jury foreperson sent a note to the judge, complaining that there was one juror “who we are concerned cannot follow your Honor’s instructions. May I please speak with your Honor or may you please interview him?”

The judge decided instead to send jurors a note reminding them of their duties to deliberate and obligation to follow his instructions on the law.

By day’s end, the jury seemed back on track, requesting clarification about what qualifies as drug distribution, an aspect of the racketeering conspiracy charge that will help determine whether Combs can be convicted or exonerated on the count.