A jury consists of 12 people who hear and see evidence presented at a trail and collectively reach a verdict of guilt or innocence. Simplifying the process somewhat, assume that the jurors hold a single simultaneous vote to determine the verdict. Each juror is asked to vote Guilty or Not Guilty. The accused is convicted if all 12 vote Guilty and is acquitted if one or more vote Not Guilty; this is known as the unanimity rule. Each juror's objective is to arrive at a verdict that is the most accurate verdict in light of the evidence, but each juror interprets the evidence in accord with her own thinking and experience. Thus, she arrives at an estimate of the guilt or innocence of the accused that is individual and private.

(1)If jurors vote truthfully (in accordance with their individual private estimates of guilt of the accused) will the verdict be Not Guilty more often under a unanimity rule or under a majority rule (where the accused if convicted if seven or more jurors vote Guilty)? Explain. What might we call the 'juror's curse' in this situation?

(2)Now consider the case in which each juror votes strategically, taking in to account the potential problems of the juror's curse and (believing that the other jurors are doing the same). Are individual jurors more likely or less likely vote Guilty under a unanimity rule when voting truthfully or voting strategically? Explain.

(3)Do you think strategic voting to account for the juror's curse would produce too many Guilty verdicts? Why or why not?