Last month, infamous "pharma bro" Martin Shkreli was convicted of several counts of securities and wire fraud by a federal jury. The 34-year-old former pharmaceutical CEO, who became infamous for price-gouging an HIV drug, was found not guilty of the top wire-fraud charges, which carried a 20-year sentence. Now, two jurors say they deeply regret not pushing to convict on those counts—and they say that a lack of sleep, confusing legal language, and one holdout juror who "bullied" them are all to blame.

The two jurors, whose names have been kept anonymous, told The Daily Beast that Counts Five and Seven, which carried the most serious penalties, were the ones that caused the contention among jurors. "We didn't know until the trial was over that Counts Five and Seven were the top counts, carrying the possibility of the most prison time," Juror A told them. "It made me ill to be persuaded to vote not guilty on those counts," Juror B added.

They said there was one juror who held up what would have been a guilty verdict on those counts:

“More than persuaded, I felt bullied into the not-guilty vote” on those counts, says Juror A. “After we voted pretty quickly and unanimously to convict Shkreli on Counts Three, Two, and Six, we came to Count Five. Our first vote on this count was 11-1 to convict.”

“One juror was adamant that the way the judge’s instructions were written, there was no way to convict,” says Juror B. “And the holdout juror would not budge.”

“The reason I am not happy with what happened in this verdict was because we were all tired and we allowed one of the jurors to bully us,” says Juror A. “We didn’t realize it was happening to us until after the verdict was entered. And that’s what has me so upset.”

That sentence from Count Five stated that Shkreli was guilty if his actions were "for the purpose of financial loss or property loss." They explained the holdout juror's reticence: "The holdout juror interpreted that to mean we had to prove that Shkreli's motive was to cause 'harm' to other people," said Juror A. "That juror changed the language from 'loss' to 'harm' and 'hurt' and then it was repeated around the room. But that's not how it reads. It says 'financial loss or property loss.'"

So why didn't the jury ask the judge to clarify? Apparently, Judge Kiyo Matsumoto had previously refused to clarify a similar issue (the meaning of 'fraudulent intent' in Count Three) and they expected nothing had changed to make her "interpret it into common language that we could better understand."

The other major factor was exhaustion. The trial had been going on for six weeks at that point and people just wanted to go home.

“I was exhausted,” says Juror A.

“Me too,” says Juror B.

“Everyone knew that the holdout juror was never going to budge and had started to convince everyone to switch to a not guilty vote,” says Juror A.

“Someone mentioned the movie ‘12 Angry Men,’” says Juror B.

“We’d been at this for almost six weeks,” says Juror A. “We were all anxious and tired.”

“Everybody wanted to go home,” Juror B says. “That ‘Friday jury syndrome’ is a reality. So by 2:30 p.m. we all voted not guilty.”

Both jurors say they didn't know anything about Shkreli before the trial, but became "horrified" by his behavior after the trial, and by the things they discovered when they researched him afterwards. "When we handed in the verdicts I wanted to vomit," said Juror A. They both believe Shkreli skated on the worst charges because of a loophole: "He got off on those counts on a technicality," said Juror B. "Not because we thought he was not guilty."

After the verdict was read, Shkreli told reporters he was "delighted by the verdict," adding, "This was a witch hunt of epic proportions. Maybe they found one or two broomsticks, but at the end of the day we've been acquitted of the most important charges in this case and I'm delighted to report that."

Since then, Shkreli has had his $5 million bail revoked after offering $5,000 to anyone who could pluck a hair from Hillary Clinton's head, sending him to what a NY Post source called "the worst prison that he'll ever be in, considering the charges he was convicted of," referring to the white collar charges.

The anonymous jurors called it poetic justice: "That's karma," said Juror B. "He's where he belongs. This man needs to be seriously punished with some serious time in a real prison."