A jury began deliberations late Friday afternoon after closing arguments in the murder and kidnapping trial of Hailey Dandurand, who alleges her ex-boyfriend was abusive to her and caused her to fear she might be killed if she did not do what he said.

The 26-year-old former Bend, Ore., woman admitted she and Stephen Brown burglarized a North Shore vacation rental only for food, but denies responsibility for the kidnapping and horrifying slaying of Telma Boinville, a beloved member of the North Shore community, and the kidnapping of her 8-year-old daughter.

“How did we get to this courtroom today?” asked Deputy Prosecutor Scott Bell. The child’s courage and consistent testimony against Dandurand, a timely tip on social media and the exhaustive efforts of law enforcement, he said.

He said Dandurand is guilty as both a principal and an accomplice, and the elements of evidence will show she is guilty as charged. Bell said circumstantial evidence permits reasonable inference of Dandurand’s intent to kill.

He said circumstantial evidence is like geometry, taking the pieces and putting them together to reach a conclusion.

“Only three people could possibly know what happened,” he said. “One is dead, the other is already convicted,” and the defense has held up Dandurand’s testimony as credible evidence, and she had “testified to deliberate falsehoods.”

Bell said the allegations she made in a petition 2-1/2 years after the alleged abuse to a judge were false, and the judge granted a protective order because Brown was in default because he was incarcerated.

“How is it that in 2-1/2 years (Brown) has the dimensions of an NFL linebacker?” Bell said, since Brown was 6 feet tall, 170 pounds, not 6-foot-4, 220 pounds, as the petition says.

And, he said, Dandurand had no injuries to her face, though she claimed she was punched full force by Brown on Dec. 7, 2017, the day of the killing.

Boinville, 51-year-old woman from Brazil who cleaned vacation homes on the side, interrupted the burglary at 59-533 Ke Iki Road and was found in a pool of blood, her arms and hands covered in deep wounds, her head with chop wounds, and countless other injuries.

The state suggests the pair would have killed her daughter, Makana Boinville Emery, who is now 14, if not for the vacation rental guest’s arrival.

Bell theorized that Brown came from behind while Boinville was warding off her attacker — Dandurand — from the front.

“The sheer number of weapons makes no sense” if it was just Brown — the hammer, knives, machete and more.

He listed several instances of apparent falsehoods in Dandurand’s testimony.

Dandurand denies tying up the girl and taping her mouth, despite the girl’s testimony in court and what she told police officers that day: that a boy with a green hair and a girl with pink hair committed the crimes.

Dandurand is being tried on charges of second-degree murder, two counts of kidnapping, second-degree unauthorized entry into a motor vehicle, burglary and unauthorized possession of personal confidential information for having Boinville’s debit card, which she confessed to using.

If the jury does not find her guilty of murder, they can find her guilty of the lesser crimes of manslaughter (extreme mental or emotional disturbance), reckless manslaughter, first- or second-degree assault, or second-degree reckless endangering and/or third- degree assault.

Dandurand admitted on the witness stand that she held a machete over Boinville while Brown went to get rope and a bag, then knelt down to bind Boinville’s hands and feet together, and tied the plastic bag over her head. But she said she was afraid she would be killed, too, if she didn’t comply with his orders.

Dandurand’s lawyer, Barry Sooalo, said, “We know Stephen Brown committed all these heinous acts.” Brown was convicted in January of the murder and kidnappings, and is awaiting sentencing Aug. 30.

Sooalo also asserted the “choice of evils” defense and the duress defense, which the defense has the responsibility to prove, complicating what the jury must consider in 84 pages of jury instructions.

Sooalo said when Dandurand came upon the disturbing scene, “she made the conscious choice to comply, ‘so that I may live.’”

“The ‘choice of evils’ defense justifies the defendant’s conduct if the defendant reasonably believes such conduct is necessary to avoid an imminent harm or evil to herself,” the instructions say.

Duress is to be considered only if the jury unanimously finds the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of a particular crime.

If they do, they have to consider whether Dandurand was coerced by threat, or by force, and that she did not recklessly place herself in the situation in which it was probable she would be subjected to duress.

Bell said, “She was not threatened, coerced,” he said. “She was where she wanted to be,” in a relationship and an environment and situation of her own making.

“Duress doesn’t fly.”

Deliberations resume Monday.