Question to pass the time!
If you were on a jury and you were the only one that disagreed with the rest of the jurors, would you eventually agree with them just to get the job done (because the judge would likely go to a majority anyway) or stand firm and keep deliberating with them until judge asks for a majority. Would you think that if everyone else is agreed against me then maybe it’s me that’s missed/not understood something?
I was on a jury where me and one other person were saying NG because the case was very far from proven. We were in our early 20's and the other jurors were all middle aged. Not sure how relevant that is...
We refused to budge and eventually the judge accepted a majority and sent the person down for four years.
To the credit of my fellow jurors, nobody was annoyed that we woudn't just go along with the majority to get it done; they all respected our position.
A year or so later, I was watching the 6 o'clock news and there was our defendant released on appeal. The officers involved were done for corruption and sent to jail.
I'm pretty sure if I was the only one saying NG I would still have held my position because it was a travesty of a case. My fellow jurors just believed the police because they wouldn't lie, would they.
I'd say if you know you have properly considered the evidence (or lack of it!) and you can live with your decision, stick to it because the majority are not always right.