I've done jury service twice, serving on seven cases in total. One juror was in his second week and insisted on being the foreman. He delivered a guilty verdict to the judge. We had to correct him and tell him the jury found the accused not guilty.
In the same case, two jurors hit it off with each other, and didn't discuss the case. They just sat back and chatted with each other. They gave their personal verdict at the start of the case, and wouldn't change their minds.
In the same case, the judge described the victim as 'defective'. He explained that this is a legal term which means the victim is of low mental capacity and is unable to make certain decisions for herself. The government / law in effect takes responsibility and acts in the person's best interests. The girl had Down's syndrome, and had sexual relations with an eighteen year old man. He was accused of rape. Two jurors said it was offensive to label the girl 'defective', and for that reason would not find the boy guilty.
In another case, a man received a television from another man at 3am, and said he had no suspicion that the TV was stolen. The jurors believed him.
Many jurors are unable to follow a case, yet failed to take notes of the salient points.
It was enlightening. I certainly wouldn't want to be at the mercy of one of our juries.