I just want to add something here unrelated to the legal question.
I was a member of a jury, here in Florida, for the trial of a girl accused of stealing around $60 of goods from some kind of party store.
Prosecution summoned store detective as a witness who testified he followed the girl out of the store and upon inspecting her shopping bag found the unpaid for merchandise. The girl admitted to that but said she just forgot to pay.
While deliberating I am pretty sure all of us knew the girl stole the stuff. We declared her innocent however. We didn't really argue as to why but I think we collectively thought the whole charade of a jury trial for $60 was ridiculous and that hanging a conviction on someone for that was disproportionate. If you had told me the sentence for her crime was 20 hours of community work and no record I think we would have convicted her hands down.
Moral of the story is that making assumptions about Jury's is like making assumptions about people in general.
I think the true moral of the story was that you and the others on the jury were crappy juries. Next time you get called for jury duty retell that story if you want to get out of jury duty.
You should know that it only went to a jury trial because the 2 sides couldn't come to an agreement beforehand. Most of the prosecutors I've dealt with don't want a trial for a minor case like that and will try their hardest to plead it out. Many times the defendant (or their attorney) wants to play the old attendance roulette game, hoping a necessary witness doesn't show for trial. They have the right to make the state prove it's case, it's on them if it goes bad. While it is possible the prosecutor in the case was just wanting to be a hardnose or pad his record with a slamdunk trial win, that hasn't been my experience.
Oh, yes, I have served on a jury and I've been called 3 times. We were pretty sure that the defendant was guilty but the prosecutor called witnesses that contradicted each other so we found ourselves acquitting.