KEW GARDENS, N.Y. — As they began deliberations Wednesday, jurors in the case of a vegan couple accused of nearly starving their daughter to death, could pore over hundreds of pages of hospital records, examine family snapshots and debate the accounts of many witnesses who testified during the three-week trial.

But the panel cannot consider whether the Swintons meant to harm their daughter, Ice. The felony assault and reckless endangerment charges that could send the couple to prison for 25 years do not require the prosecution to demonstrate criminal intent, only a high degree of recklessness in their behavior.

Silva Swinton

The pair, both 32, raised Ice on a homemade soy-and-herb infant formula that prosecution doctors contend left her as severely malnourished as a Third World famine victim. At 15 months, she weighed just 10 pounds, had no teeth and could not walk or talk. (Court papers list the girl's name as Ice, although the parents say it is spelled Iice.)

The jury deliberated for more than six hours Wednesday without reaching a verdict. They are sequestered and will resume weighing evidence Thursday morning.

The top count against the Swintons is first-degree assault, which requires proof that the couple caused a serious injury to Ice by acting with a "depraved indifference to human life."

Depraved indifference, as Judge Richard Buchter instructed the nine-woman, three-man panel, means reckless behavior "so wanton, so deficient in moral sense and conduct" that it equals intentional action "in blameworthiness."

Similarly, the second felony, first-degree reckless endangerment, requires proof that the defendants were acting with depraved indifference and created "a grave risk of death to another person."

If the jurors don't find depraved indifference, they can opt to convict on misdemeanor assault and reckless endangerment charges. Those lesser offenses, which carry no mandatory prison time, require the prosecution to prove only reckless conduct, that is behavior that creates a "substantial and unjustifiable risk" of physical injury and is a "gross deviation" from normal behavior.

Both sides focused on depraved indifference and recklessness in their summations, and jurors appeared to be concentrating on the complex language of the law as well. The jury sent two separate notes to Judge Buchter Wednesday afternoon asking to be reread the definition of first-degree assault and one note asking for an explanation of depraved indifference.

In her summation, Joseph Silva's attorney argued that the parents never realized what was happening to their daughter. The lawyer, Ronna Gordon-Galchus, told jurors the developmental progress Ice made, small though it was, led the Swintons to believe the girl was on track. She noted the amount of care the parents took in grinding soy beans, nuts and herbs for Ice's meals.

"Depraved indifference? Taking the time and effort to go through all that?" Gordon-Galchus said.

Silva Swinton's lawyer pointed to a social worker and two emergency medical technicians who cursorily examined the girl a week before she was removed from the home and said they had not seen obvious medical problems. If trained professionals couldn't see them, how could the parents, lawyer Christopher Shella said.

"The issue is not whether the child had these problems, but whether the parents could perceive these problems," Shella said. "If they didn't perceive the risk, there's no way they could have ignored it."

Prosecutor Eric Rosenbaum, however, told the jury that the Swintons were "willfully blind" and said Ice's health woes were simply too big to be ignored.

"A 15-month-old child who cannot walk, cannot stand and cannot crawl — that tells you that something was very, very wrong," he said.