Either 17 of the counts are Guilty or they are Not Guilty. I can only imagine that if the one remaining count cannot be resolved, and the others are all guilty, then the Foreman would suggest that they vote Not guilty on that one and go home. Of course if the situation is the opposite, then they will continue to argue until someone is satisfied.
I’m guessing is that they have 17 counts of Not Guilty.
Why does everybody keep assuming it’s either 17 guilty or 17 not guilty. It could just as easily be some of each. Some guilty, some not guilty.
Your logic makes a lot of sense. This one count they are having problems resolving would be relatively inconsequential for the total sentence if they have already found him guilty on a majority of the counts. But if they’ve found him not guilty on all or the vast majority of the other 17, then this one count has more impact on the sentence and thus is of greater consequence, warranting the extra effort of going back to the judge.
More likely a mixed bag, I’m guessing guilty on most of them. It’s not all or nothing.