I was on a jury deciding a driving while intoxicated case. The first vote was basically two of us against the rest of the jury. The reasons I heard justifying the guilty verdict votes were things like "Well, I'm a mom and I think drunk driving is terrible. That's why I think she is guilty".
Fortunately, there was one other educated person on the jury, and eventually, after discussing the actual facts of the case the rest of the jury understood and we acquitted the accused.
It was scary, during the selection process, the candidates mostly fell into two categories. Those looking forward to the $40 (as I remember it) allowance they gave us for each day of the trial and those that valued their time at more than $5/hour. The latter group all seemed to have some excuse for getting out of the trial. If it wasn't for the two of us on the jury, I believe the accused woman would have have been found guilty.
I was on a jury deciding a driving while intoxicated case. The first vote was basically two of us against the rest of the jury. The reasons I heard justifying the guilty verdict votes were things like "Well, I'm a mom and I think drunk driving is terrible. That's why I think she is guilty".
Fortunately, there was one other educated person on the jury, and eventually, after discussing the actual facts of the case the rest of the jury understood and we acquitted the accused.
It was scary, during the selection process, the candidates mostly fell into two categories. Those looking forward to the $40 (as I remember it) allowance they gave us for each day of the trial and those that valued their time at more than $5/hour. The latter group all seemed to have some excuse for getting out of the trial. If it wasn't for the two of us on the jury, I believe the accused woman would have have been found guilty.