PORTLAND – A jury left the Cumberland County courthouse Monday without reaching a verdict in the case of Robert LaPointe, who is charged with two counts of manslaughter in connection with the boating deaths of a couple on Long Lake in 2007.

The jury of five men and seven women mulled the fate of LaPointe, 39, of Medway, Mass., and Bridgton, for about four hours before breaking for the day.

Besides the Class A felony manslaughter charges, he is charged with two counts of aggravated operating a watercraft under the influence and a single count of reckless conduct with a dangerous weapon, all Class C felonies. He faces a total of 30 years in prison, the maximum penalty for a Class A felony. Any additional sentence likely would be served at the same time, including the Class C crimes, punishable by up to five years.

In her closing argument Monday morning, Cumberland County District Attorney Stephanie Anderson instructed the jury to consider just two questions: Whether LaPointe was reckless and whether his blood alcohol level was over the legal limit.

If, Anderson argued, the jury’s unanimous answer to both questions is “yes,” then it must find him guilty of all five counts.

Anxious to get to dinner eight miles up the lake on the night of Aug. 11, 2007, LaPointe “was going to run over anything in his path and Terry Raye Trott and Suzanne Groetzinger were unlucky enough to be in his path. That’s the tragedy,” Anderson said.

Evidence presented during the two-week trial showed that LaPointe’s 32-foot offshore racing boat equipped with dual 425-horsepower engines smashed into the back of the 14-foot motorboat driven by Trott, 55, of Harrison. The larger boat’s propellers severely injured Trott, who drowned, and his passenger, Suzanne Groetzinger, 44, of Berwick, who suffered fatal arm and neck wounds.

LaPointe’s boat ripped off the smaller boat’s deck then launched about 40 feet, ejecting him and his passenger, who swam to shore. When his boat landed back in the lake, it continued unmanned to shore, where it climbed about 160 feet into the woods, up a 14-foot hill.

In her closing comments, Anderson asked jurors to consider inconsistencies between the statements LaPointe made on the night of the crash to wardens and a nursing supervisor at Bridgton Hospital against his sworn testimony on the witness stand last week. She asked the jury to consider LaPointe’s motive in changing his statements concerning his alcohol consumption and boat speed between the time of the crash and the trial.

The state’s witnesses said LaPointe admitted to them that he drank eight or more beers the day of the crash and was driving his boat 45-50 mph at impact.

On Friday, LaPointe told the jury he drank three beers and took only a sip of a fourth that day. His boat was going 30 mph, he said.

A reasonable nighttime speed was 15 mph, according to a maritime expert, the speed Trott’s boat was estimated to be traveling, she said.

Anderson asked the jury to consider the credibility of the state’s witnesses, including the nursing supervisor, wardens and witnesses to the accident, none of whom had known LaPointe prior to the accident.

Anderson reminded the jury that LaPointe’s blood-alcohol test of .11 percent three hours after the crash proved beyond reasonable doubt that he was intoxicated at the time of the collision. The state has determined that anyone above the state limit of .08 percent is impaired.

Trott’s boat had the right of way, she said. Navigational rules require that the so-called “overtaking boat,” the boat that comes up from behind, is required to keep clear of the boat it is overtaking. Even if the boat being overtaken has no lights, it doesn’t absolve LaPointe’s overtaking boat, called “No Patience,” from responsibility to keep clear, Anderson reminded the jurors of maritime experts’ earlier testimony.

“Could there be anything more lethal than No Patience in the hands of Robert LaPointe on Aug. 11?” Anderson asked. “He gambled … he played with the lives of people.”

LaPointe’s attorney, George Hassett, said the state had not met its burden of proving recklessness, nor legal intoxication, beyond reasonable doubt.

He argued that Trott’s boat had a black hull, a black deck, a black motor and no lights, making it virtually invisible on the lake at night. Consider Trott’s actions as well as the defendant’s, he said.

“That’s not ‘blame the victim,’ it’s look at the facts,” he said.

Hassett argued that the state should have been more diligent in determining Trott’s blood-alcohol level at the time of the crash. Measured after his body was recovered days later, it was at .07 percent.

“I have to ask myself why didn’t they conduct a drinking history of Terry Raye Trott,” Hassett said, suggesting that perhaps at the time of the crash Trott may have been legally drunk, a factor that might have swayed the jury as to where blame lies.

“It was a horrible collision,” Hassett said. “It was a horrible death” for Trott and Groetzinger.

Hassett sought to cast doubt on the reliability of the blood alcohol test, suggesting that the sample taken from LaPointe was improperly handled by the warden and possibly compromised by the nurse, who may not have correctly mixed the blood with preservative.

None of the witnesses, Hassett argued, including the state’s witnesses, testified that there was any visual sign that LaPointe was impaired after the crash and that the warden failed to conduct a field sobriety test to determine whether the more invasive blood alcohol test was needed.

“Is that evidence of intoxication or impairment? I suggest not.”

Hassett focused on the fact that Trott’s stern light likely was unlit when the crash occurred.

“That boat was out there with no lights,” he said. Although boats are required to have “sounding devices” aboard, none was found at the crash scene on the lake.

Hassett reminded the jury that there is no speed limit on Long Lake and no limit on what type of boats are allowed on the waterway.

The jury sent three notes to the judge presiding over the case, seeking clarification about jury instructions on the law and requesting an easel, to view some of the 72 exhibits presented at trial. It’s expected to resume deliberations at 9 a.m. Tuesday.