or against me, but that they were going to become someone that the rest of the jury would look to out of deference. who am i to decide? i'm not a lawyer. let's ask the lawyer. when you have three, then maybe they neutralize each other. the other thing as a lawyer, i tended to want people who were educated, people who might be able to work through sometimes complicated jury instructions. keep track of all of the evidence, and then make a very elemental decision about the evidence here. i could see -- so lawyers might be good for that reason. they might neutralize that jury of one concern that i would have. from a defense perspective, i might be less interested in having juries on board because they might be better suited to process all of the evidence and look at the elements. i suppose if you're the defense, one thing that you might realize about lawyers is they will truly hold the prosecution to guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. not deciding based on gut, it seems like he's guilty or seems like he did something wrong, they'll look at that very