Discussion on Jury Verdict and Law

Are y'all saying that this one juror is a hero because they stood their ground?

No. In the eyes of the law, if there is any doubt, then you

have to vote not guilty, okay?

So this juror should have been removed, because that's how it goes.

That's the way the law is written.

Not just what you think or what you... That's just not how it works.

So

they should have removed the juror, because they're not,

they're not playing the game. That's not how it works.

That's why Reddington is mad. Reddington is mad because these 11 jurors

that have

come to an agreement,

or come to all one conclusion, have basically stated, "Hey,

this other guy has stated that there's doubt,

but he's not coming off his verdict, so he's not following the law."

And that, at that point, the judge should have removed the juror

or replaced the

juror, because they come in every day and the judge asks them the same

questions, and they agree, "Yes, they can follow the rules of the law," da,

da, da,

da, da, and he's not. So that's why they're frustrated.

It's not because he's just holding up on his verdict.

Yeah, he's holding up on his verdict, but he also has doubt.

It's not that he fully believes

in the verdict. That's what they're mad about