Question

Hey guys can someone help me out with this question?

One disadvantage of consensus building is that it may encourage
an individual to compromise her/ his personal beliefs in the name of group unity. For a jury to reach a verdict, all 12 jurors must come to an agreement about a defendant’s guilt or innocence. Let’s say you’re on a jury and you think the defen- dant may be innocent, but your 11 fellow jurors have all voted “guilty.” You feel pressured to vote “guilty” as well. It’s been a long trial, and everyone just wants to go home. You’re not convinced that the defen- dant is innocent, and your peers are convinced she is guilty. Is it ethical for you to vote “guilty” as well?

Answer 1

I think  it would be important for the one jurist to vote not guilty ie to have the courage to do so because for someone to be penalized for something they didn't do is ia very serious thing especially if the sentence is a lengthy one so the other members of the jury should be made to explain just why they think the way they do and not go unchallenged.