It's sad to see so many Freepers engaging in name-calling and character assassination over this.
There seems to be some question about whether the jury foreman gave the rest of the jurors erronious information about what the judge would or would not accept as a verdict or lack of one. This sort of thing has been sufficient grounds for appeal on a good many cases.
I was recently on a jury (and was foreman) on a case much less important than this one where we had one woman who was convinced the defendant was "probably" guilty. When I asked her what difference that made, that it wasn't our job to decide if he was guilty but only if the prosecution had proved it beyond reasonable doubt, she was totally confused. It is amazing how little people know about how our justice system works.