The lawyers have tons of information about the jury pool. Both sides have unlimited "for cause" challenges, plus an equal number of peremptory challenges.
The prospective jurors are scrutinized by the lawyers and the judge for unfair political bias. Both sides battle to get rid of those prospective jurors who they believe are least inclined to adopt each side's theory of the case.
The net result/objective is seating 12 neutral jurors.
Verdicts are unanimous. Why did the other 9 jurors render the same NOT GUILTY verdict as the 3 who you assume did not honor their oaths?
Are you OK if black jurors serve on a panel where the defendant is black? Are you OK if jurors who own AR-15s serve on Kyle Rittenhouse's panel?
Give jurors the benefit of the doubt.