Flexibility

• Majority decisions are more flexible than unanimous verdicts, as long as there are more than nine jurors. In cases where the huge majority of the jurors believe the defendant is guilty, all it takes is one jury member to prevent a conviction by taking the opposite view.
  
  

Less Pressure

• Under an unanimous verdict rule, pressure exist on the members of the jury to follow the majority, even if they have their own doubts regarding the guilt or innocence of the accused individual. With the majority rule, they don't have such pressure. Jury members might be more likely to express their own opinions on the situation.
  
  

Speed of Verdict

• Juries under the majority verdict system deliver verdicts quicker than under the unanimous verdict system. If one or more members of the jury have an opposing opinion of the accused individual's guilt, less time is spent on negotiating. The speed of deliberation doesn't affect the concluding verdict (whether it be majoritarian or unanimous), so accuracy isn't lost for the sake of reduced debating time.
  
  

Other Advantages

• Other advantages of majority verdicts, depending on your belief system, include the verdicts being more democratic and less favorable to the accused. Majority verdicts don't allow the minority to hold power over the majority by taking an opposite view despite the quality of evidence available. Majority verdicts also prevent individuals from being acquitted due to a jury's inability to reach a unanimous decision.