By Martin HickmanJurors at the trial of Sun journalists accused of making illegal payments to public officials may return a majority verdict in each of the remaining counts, the judge told Kingston Crown Court today.Judge Richard Marks QC issued a majority verdict direction shortly after 10am today in an attempt to break the deadlock among the 12 jurors, who went into retirement two weeks ago. He told the jury that although they should still try to reach unanimity, they could return verdicts with a majority of 11-1 or 10-2.In a moment of high drama on Friday afternoon, the jury foreman returned not guilty verdicts on five of the 14 counts, including all those faced by The Sun's picture editor John Edwards and the paper's former East Anglia reporter John Troup.The jury also acquitted on one charge each faced by the Sun's development director Graham Dudman and by Ben O'Driscoll, the tabloid's former deputy news editor, who now occupies the same position at the Daily Mail.However the jury foreman said that he and his peers were split on the remaining nine charges faced by Mr Dudman and Mr O'Driscoll and two other defendants: The Sun's head of news Chris Pharo and its Thames Valley reporter Jamie Pyatt.The jury did not sit on Monday and Tuesday because a juror was ill with a sore throat.Addressing the jurors this morning, Mr Justice Marks said that they should still try to reach "unanimous verdicts on all the remaining counts" but added that considering "the time that's now elapsed" he would accept majority verdicts.He answered an earlier question from the jury as to whether they could use other evidence in the case when considering the case against Mr Pyatt on Count 3, which involves payments by Mr Pyatt to a Surrey police officer.Mr Justice Marks said that all the evidence in the case was cross-admissible and could be considered by the jury if they wished, but stressed that it was a matter for them how much weight they placed on any evidence.The judge added that, in order to find Mr Pyatt guilty of Count 3, the jury must be sure and by a majority of at least 10-2 that at least one story for which the reporter had paid the policeman passed the threshold for conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office.