The 37-year-old man convicted of murdering his wife’s 47-year-old ex-lover, Jon Tokuhara, will not be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

Jurors unanimously found Friday that the state had not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that, for the protection of the public, his sentence should be extended from life with the possibility of parole to life without the possibility of parole.

However, the 12 trial jurors could not come to a unanimous decision on whether the state had proved that Thompson’s 20-year sentence for carrying or use of a firearm in a separate offense should be extended to life with the possibility of parole.

Before the verdict Friday, Thompson, while seated wearing a long-sleeved blue dress shirt and dark blue trousers, held his hand over his mouth. But as he stood during the reading of the decision, he showed no emotion.

Judge Paul Wong will sentence Thompson on June 27.

Deputy Prosecutor Benjamin Rose said outside the courtroom he will ask the court to have the two sentences run consecutively, and will also ask the Hawaii Paroling Authority for a high minimum sentence.

He said mandatory minimum sentences for life with parole can range from 15 to 30 years based on various factors including a defendant’s remorse and history.

The judge thanked the jurors for their service a final time, saying they are the longest-serving jury he has had in his courtroom, and offered them time to discuss the trial with him and the attorneys after the hearing.

DNA evidence was key for jurors in returning a guilty verdict, said a source with knowledge of their discussion.

The attorneys broke their silence with the media Friday regarding Tuesday’s guilty verdict since the decision on the extended- sentencing hearing had been pending.

Thompson’s attorney, Nelson Goo, said he was disappointed with the guilty verdict but was pleased with the decision against extended sentencing.

“We will appeal, and we believe there are very much appealable issues,” he said, referring to the guilty verdict.

Goo declined further comment since there is pending litigation, referring to a wrongful death lawsuit filed by Tokuhara’s mother against Thompson and his wife, Joyce.

Rose said, “We’re very pleased with the jury’s verdict this past week. We have been finally able to bring justice for the Tokuhara family. We are extremely thankful to the jury for their hard work in this case. … They did their job, and we brought justice to their family.”

Rose said he would keep the discussion with jurors private, but discussed the decision to retool the state’s case after the first trial in 2023 ended in a mistrial.

”After the first trial we decided to re-strategize to bring in more evidence, including DNA evidence that was more conclusive, as well as a fire investigator from the Honolulu Fire Department … to debunk the defense’s theory that the fire in the backyard was tiki torches. In fact, it was a fire to destroy evidence.

“Those two key pieces of evidence this time around, I think, helped convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that Eric Thompson was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of killing Jon Tokuhara.”

He said while a lot of the evidence was circumstantial, the DNA evidence was direct evidence that Thompson was the killer.

The DNA was swabbed from a bucket hat that fell off the head of the prime suspect as he ran from the scene of the killing in video surveillance footage, and was left behind on the ground.

Deputy Prosecutor Joel Garner adeptly handled the DNA evidence portion of the trial, which included highly detailed evidence regarding the Police Department’s use of probabilistic genotyping software by Cybergenetics, an outside company.

Garner also questioned the credibility of the defense’s expert witnesses who tried to refute the evidence.

The first trial did not focus on the results of the Cybernetics’ TruAllele software, which determined the very high probability that the DNA from the hat belonged to Thompson.

The Honolulu Police Department’s crime lab did not yet have that capability and sought the outside services of Cybergenetics. The crime lab’s analysis of the DNA evidence was inconclusive. HPD now uses probabilistic genotyping.

“Unfortunately, in the first trial we weren’t able to pre­sent the DNA evidence provided by Cybergenetics due to delayed discovery matters,” Rose said.

Rose said the state’s case also relied on video surveillance, the jury listening to the defendant’s story and “seeing right through his lies,” including his alibi that he was at the Waimanalo dump.

“We were allowed to make reasonable inferences, and we were successful in this case,” he said.

The Tokuharas said in a written statement:

“Sadly, there are no winners in this situation. This has been a painful and heartbreaking journey for everyone involved. While we believe justice has been served, it does not bring Jon back or erase the deep sorrow and loss we feel each day. A life was lost. Families have been shattered, and nothing can truly make any of this right.

“We are grateful for the hard work and dedication of the Prosecutor’s Office, the Honolulu Police Department, and the jurors. Their commitment to seeking the truth and upholding justice has meant so much to us during this difficult time. Thank you, as well, to our family and friends for their unwavering support and strength throughout this emotional process.

“We think of Jon every day and will forever remember his kindness, dedication and love for our hometown of Waipahu, and the absolute joy he brought to those around him. His memory and legacy will always remain in our hearts.”

Nicole Trazo, 53, who attended both trials, said, “Jon was my very best friend for 35 years. He was everybody’s best friend.”

She said that she was pleased with the verdict, and although it brings closure and justice for the family and friends, it can never bring him back.

During closing arguments Thursday morning, Goo said the state’s arguments to extend the sentence was “fear-mongering” and that “life with the possibility of parole is already substantial.”

He said Thompson has no prior history of arrests or convictions, and he’s going to be supervised for life under a parole officer.

“Eric Thompson is compassionate, hardworking, generous with his time,” Goo said. He is kind to animals and loves children, he said.

Rose said Thompson, “when confronted with a failed marriage, chose to kill. … He chose to take a son away from his mother. Lilly Tokuhara never had a chance to say goodbye … to her son.”

He said Thompson took great pains to conceal his identity and took the time to carefully plan the murder.

“He is a stone-cold, convicted murderer,” Rose said. “When someone like that decides to commit murder, to kill somebody, they are a danger.”

He called the 12 firearms recovered from his home his “arsenal of death.”

Rose said that “the state is not saying because you have firearms you are a bad person or a dangerous person. But when you are a convicted killer and a gun enthusiast, that should scare any reasonable person.”

Wong reminded jurors before they went into the jury room to deliberate, “You cannot be influenced by pity for the defendant or by passion or prejudice against the defendant.”

Rose, who has been on the case since January 2022, when the murder occurred, said the trials were the result of a team effort. He said everyone from co-counsel Garner, who served on both trials, lead detective Kaiminaauao Mead, homicide Lt. Deena Thoemmes as well as other police, fire and prosecutor’s office personnel worked hard on the case.

“This is an emotionally charged case. You have families that are very close to their respective individuals. The Tokuhara family was there every day. The Thompson family was there every day. There were no winners in this case.

“Mr. Thompson is going away for his life, and his family is going to have to live with that,” Rose said. “He’s victimized them as much as the Tokuhara family as well as the community overall.”

Wong told the attorneys earlier that he enjoyed watching their “mastery” and noted that one attorney’s days may be numbered.

For Goo, who has been highly active as a defense attorney, including in numerous high-profile court- appointed cases, this may be one of his last murder trials in his four-decade-long career.

He said he stopped taking new cases in November.

“I’m winding down my practice, but I still have five more murders to go.”