Personally, if I was on trial I would prefer to have the decision in the hands of someone properly trained in understanding and interpreting the law, rather than a bunch of inexperienced, untrained armatures who could be coerced into making a wrong decision by a charismatic and enthusiastic legal councel.
I totally agree, and the same can be said of a charismatic jury foreman. We saw this in the 1991 trial of Joh after which is was revealed that the jury foreman was a member of the Young Nationals
From Wiki
In 1991 Bjelke-Petersen faced criminal trial for
perjury arising out of the evidence he had given to the Fitzgerald inquiry (an earlier proposed charge of corruption was incorporated into the perjury charge). Bjelke-Petersen's former police Special Branch bodyguard Sergeant Bob Carter told the court that in 1986 he had twice been given packages of cash totalling $210,000 at the premier's office. He was told to take them to a Brisbane city law firm and then watch as the money was deposited in a company bank account.[SUP][
citation needed][/SUP] The money had been given over by developer Sng Swee Lee, and the bank account was in the name of Kaldeal, operated by Sir Edward Lyons a trustee of the National Party.[SUP]
[59][/SUP] John Huey, a Fitzgerald Inquiry investigator, later told
Four Corners: "I said to Robert Sng, 'Well what did Sir Joh say to you when you gave him this large sum of money?' And he said, "All he said was, 'thank you, thank you, thank you'."[SUP]
[60][/SUP] The jury could not agree on a verdict. In 1992 it was revealed that the jury foreman, Luke Shaw, was a member of the Young Nationals and was identified with the "Friends of Joh" movement. A special prosecutor announced in 1992 there would be no retrial because Bjelke-Petersen, then aged 81, was too old. Developer Sng Swee Lee refused to return from Singapore for a retrial. Bjelke-Petersen said his defence costs sent him broke.[SUP]
[61][/SUP]