A Maryland man calmly described to detectives how he methodically drowned his three young children by holding them underwater in a hotel bathtub for 10 minutes each — a confession that was recorded by police and played in court Wednesday.

Mark A. Castillo, 43, of Rockville faces trial on three counts of first-degree murder in the March 2008 deaths of his children: 6-year-old Anthony, 4-year-old Austin and 2-year-old Athena. His attorneys contend that he is not criminally responsible for the slayings — Maryland's version of an insanity plea.

Castillo's attorneys are trying to prevent his two statements to police from being admitted as evidence at trial. Prosecutors played a tape of the first of those statements for the judge Wednesday to verify its authenticity. The jury has not yet been chosen.

Asked by homicide Detective Raymond Yost why he killed his children, Castillo let out a long sigh before describing a custody battle with his former wife.

"We've been going through an extremely hard divorce. ... My wife had denied my visitation," Castillo said. "I felt like I didn't want them to be in this world anymore."

Castillo described how he took his children to the Maryland Science Center in Baltimore and then checked into a Marriott hotel downtown.

Courts spokesman David Bookstaver says the jury notified a judge Thursday that it had reached a decision in its 11th day of deliberating on the criminal charges against Astor's son and an estate lawyer.

The verdict is expected to be announced at 2:15 p.m.

The jury's notice came as the judge was preparing to ask them whether they had a verdict on any charge in the 18-count indictment. He didn't get the chance.

The late socialite's son, Anthony Marshall, and lawyer Francis Morrissey deny looting her nearly $200 million estate.

President Barack Obama on Tuesday said he would nominate a pair of Northeastern judges to appeals court positions.

Judge Denny Chin, a district court judge for the Southern District of New York, and Rhode Island Superior Court Justice O. Rogeriee Thompson were tapped for positions. If confirmed by the Senate, Chin would serve as a judge in the 2nd Circuit, based in New York, and Thompson would serve in the Boston-based 1st Circuit.

"Judges Chin and Thompson have displayed exceptional dedication to public service throughout their careers," Obama said in a statement. "They have served on the bench with distinction in New York and Rhode Island, and I am honored to nominate them today to serve the American people on the United States Court of Appeals."

Chin was born in Hong Kong and moved to the United States at the age of 2. A Princeton University and Fordham Law School graduate, he clerked in the Southern District of New York and worked in private practice. He was an assistant U.S. attorney for four years before returning to private law.

A La Fox woman has been convicted of stealing $137,237 from the St. Charles law firm of Day and Tietz in 2004, it was announced Tuesday.

Ann M. Day, 52, of the 1N600 block of Harley Road, was convicted Friday by Kane County Circuit Court Judge Timothy Sheldon. Testimony was heard in May. Sheldon issued his verdict in writing.

Day was found guilty of 12 counts of theft (four of them a Class 1 felony and eight a Class 2 felony) and 16 counts of forgery (a Class 3 felony), according to the Kane County State's Attorney's Office.

Day was arrested in late February of 2005 by St. Charles police after a four-month investigation. Her law partner, Karen Tietz, called police when irregularities in the firm's accounting surfaced.

The two women had formed the firm in January 2004. They knew each other from participation at Hosanna! Lutheran Church in St. Charles, for which Day provided legal services.

From January to October 2004, Day took checks made out to the firm and altered them to make them payable to herself, including forging her partner's name. She would then deposit them in her personal account. She also wrote checks to herself from the firm's checking account and then altered the firm's ledger to misrepresent the purpose of the reimbursement. Additionally, she asked clients to make checks payable to her, not the firm.

Day faces a sentence of probation or between four and 15 years in prison. She remains free on $2,500 bond. No sentencing date has been announced.

The Supreme Court appeared divided between conservatives and liberals Wednesday over whether a cross on federal park land in California violates the Constitution.

Several conservative justices seemed open to the Obama administration's argument that Congress' decision to transfer to private ownership the land on which the cross sits in the Mojave National Preserve should take care of any constitutional questions.

"Isn't that a sensible interpretation" of a court order prohibiting the cross' display on government property? Justice Samuel Alito asked.

The liberal justices, on the other hand, indicated that they agree with a federal appeals court that ruled that the land transfer was a sort of end run around the First Amendment prohibition against government endorsement of religion.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, often the decisive vote in these cases, said nothing to tip his hand.

The tenor of the discussion suggested that the justices might resolve this case narrowly, rather than use it to make an important statement about their view of the separation of church and state.

The cross, on an outcrop known as Sunrise Rock, has been covered in plywood for the past several years following federal court rulings that it violates the First Amendment prohibition. Court papers describe the cross as being 5 feet to 8 feet tall.

A former National Park Service employee, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, sued to have the cross removed or covered after the agency refused to allow erection of a Buddhist memorial nearby. Frank Buono describes himself as a practicing Catholic who has no objection to religious symbols, but he took issue with the government's decision to allow the display of only the Christian symbol.

Democrats want to counter a recent Supreme Court ruling that makes it harder for older workers to prove they are the victims of age discrimination.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is hearing testimony Wednesday on a bill that would effectively nullify a high court decision that changed the interpretation of age bias laws.

The high court said it is not enough for employees to show age is a motivating factor in a demotion or layoff. Rather, workers must prove it is the deciding factor.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy says that sets the bar too high for discrimination victims.

The plaintiff in the case was invited to testify. He's Jack Gross, who was employed by an insurance company in West Des Moines, Iowa.