Chapter 5 looks at deliberations. The traditional view of deliberations is that jurors are capable from the moment they are selected to deliberate in a way that yields a fair and just verdict. In contrast, the transformation view recognizes that jurors must perform a task for which they have not volunteered; they must be aware of their personal biases and try not to be swayed by them; they must deliberate to try to reach a unanimous verdict with a group of strangers; and they must decide the facts and apply the law even though both are new to them. However, the experiences they have gone through as jurors have helped to prepare them to deliberate. In addition, the setting and structure of the deliberations help them to maintain the necessary discipline. The jurors are secluded in the jury room; they are required to vote and to give reasons to the group; if unanimity is required they must come to a group understanding; and they must make a decision that has serious consequences. There are features of deliberations that help jurors to assume their role as jurors, such as having a foreperson, a diverse jury, a group deliberation, and the judge's instructions.

This chapter examines American jury films and what they teach the world about American juries. Some of the lessons they offer are instructive, but others do not comport with American juries in practice. One persistent and misleading message of jury films is that juries include a holdout juror, even though holdout jurors occur infrequently on actual juries. The most famous American jury film, 12 Angry Men, teaches this lesson; however, it also shows a jury that ultimately works hard to arrive at a responsible verdict, which is what most actual juries try to do. This film is enjoying an extraordinary renaissance; it is being remade into foreign versions across the globe. This chapter also explores how 12 Angry Men serves as a window into American juries; foreign remakes of it also provide a window into the aspirations of countries around the world.