A jury will continue deliberating Thursday after a day of contentious arguments from prosecutors, defense attorneys and the judge in the manslaughter trial against a former school bus driver accused of recklessly killing a fourth-grader during the second week of school in 2005.

Because of media accounts of courtroom arguments Wednesday, a prosecutor requested and the judge allowed the jury deliberating the fate of Jerry M. Cook, who is on trial in the death of 9-year-old Ruth Young, to be sequestered overnight.

Assistant District Attorney Warren Diepraam told state District Judge Marc Carter that the state would not agree to let the jury separate for the night because of online postings about whether there was enough evidence to send the case to jurors.

"Based on concern about today's publicity, (Diepraam) wanted the jury sequestered," defense attorney Robert Fickman said Wednesday. "And we objected to it."

Jurors are automatically sequestered unless both sides agree to let them separate, Diepraam said after the jury was sequestered.

"Jurors should base their decisions solely on facts presented in trial, not complex legal issues argued between lawyers and judges," Diepraam said.

Earlier in the afternoon, the Houston Chronicle reported on a heated 45-minute exchange, outside the presence of the jury, in which Carter grilled Diepraam on whether there was more evidence proving Cook did not check his mirrors before the Aug. 18, 2005, incident that killed the Frazier Elementary pupil as she crossed the street on her bike.

After taking the matter under consideration, Carter allowed Diepraam to go to the jury with several theories of culpability.

Carter told Diepraam he wasn't going to allow the fact that a child died as evidence that the incident was a criminal act, a legal issue since the case began.

"If he looked at the mirrors and didn't see her, that's not a crime," Carter told Diepraam.

The exchange began after lunch, after both sides rested and the court was preparing a charge to read to the jury. The defense filed a motion for what is called a directed verdict, a standard procedure that says not enough evidence was presented to take the case to the jury.

Diepraam reminded the judge that his case included two eyewitnesses who saw the accident, and several experts including an accident reconstruction expert.

Carter asked for eyewitness testimony that Cook didn't check his mirrors.

"Who testified that he didn't follow the safety procedures?" the judge asked Diepraam.

"An expert witness did," the prosecutor responded.

Diepraam said that cases are commonly tried with expert witnesses, and that in this case, the job of the school bus expert was to provide evidence after the fact.

The judge then said: "The expert witness wasn't there. You can't say that the guy didn't follow safety procedures because he didn't see him."

In the middle of tense exchange, Diepraam told the judge, "With all due respect to the court, I know you're wrong on this." That comment was greeted with laughter by the courtroom.

After the exchange, the judge headed to his chambers, saying he wanted to consider it.

"This is a tough case. A little girl was killed. I don't want to not send it to the jury, but I have a job to do," he told Diepraam.

When he returned, Carter allowed Diepraam to present several legal theories to the jury — a blow to the defense, Fickman said.

Diepraam, Fickman and Cook's other attorney, Stanley Schneider, clashed early in the day on several issues including the hearsay testimony of a witness who wasn't called during the trial.

The jury is scheduled to resume deliberations today.

If convicted of manslaughter, Cook faces punishment of two- to 20-years in prison.