I’m in the US, but my experience was a lot like that. I ended up as the foreman of a jury that was given an unusually nasty domestic abuse case. It was an intense experience. The court phase lasted three days. The testimony was disturbing and brutal, but the judge did a great job on all counts. The trial was well managed, the legal issues were clearly laid out, and the jury was told what we needed to do and how we should go about it.
Once we were sent to deliberate, everyone settled in rather quickly to doing their jobs carefully and honestly. We had long, detailed, and surprisingly analytical discussions. We requested transcripts of several key sections of the testimony and reviewed some of it word-by-word. Despite the intensity of the subject matter, everyone tried to keep the process rational and not emotional.
There were two holdouts. No one complained about them. We talked with them about why they had reservations and then dug into the evidence around those issues. We spent about a day-and-a-half deliberating, but we did come to a consensus. At the end, I think everyone felt good about our verdict, and about the way we came to it.
The whole process was very much what you hope a trial would be like, but don’t really expect to see. The judge and the lawyers were all engaged, professional, and competent. Everyone on the jury took their jobs seriously. They were thoughtful, careful, and thorough.
That experience actually did a lot for my faith in humanity.