The trial begins as the juries hear the evidence of a husband, John, who's killed his wife, Helen, with a hammer but denies murder. Divisions and disagreements soon form between the two juries...

As the jurors hear from the defence, one feels that there's 'victim blaming' at play, while another begins to sympathise with the defendant. But will the 'loss of control' plea impact their verdicts?

The prosecution cross-examine the defendant. The jurors become increasingly divided and a character statement leaves both juries conflicted. With the verdict approaching, will they reach the same one?

The prosecution and defence give their closing speeches and the juries retire to decide their verdicts. After heated debates, both juries finally reach their verdicts... but are they the same one?

A word-by-word restaging of a real-life murder trial, in which a young mother find herself in the dock after stabbing her boyfriend in the chest with a kitchen knife. She says it was self-defence - but the ultimate decision lies with the jury, made up of 12 local members of the public. Will they reach the same verdict as the original trial?

The jury are presented with evidence of the victim's previous violent behaviour - including CCTV footage from the night of the killing itself. Some jurors believe the defendant, and are convinced she is a victim of domestic abuse. But others suspect she is lying, and think the evidence doesn't fully add up. As the divide in the jury deepens, alliances and friendships begin to form.

The prosecution cross-examine the defendant, trying to demonstrate that the defendant is lying about the night of the murder. They present evidence of her previous violent behaviour and challenge her over the lies she told to police and emergency services about her boyfriend's death. Tempers flare in the jury room, as jurors increasingly disagree with each other. An argument leads to tears, and rival groups begin to accuse the others of failing to assess the evidence properly.

After a final, surprising new piece of evidence from the defence, both sides present their closing arguments. The jurors retire to consider their verdict. Arguments break out, and the foreperson is forced to plead for calm. Can the deadlocked, bitterly opposed jurors find common ground and deliver justice? Conversely, there remains the possibility that they may fail to deliver a verdict at all.

Two brothers admit that they stabbed their stepdad more than 69 times while he was asleep, but the jurors must decide whether this was an act of calculated revenge or one of desperation...

As 14-year-old defendant Daniel takes the stand, CCTV and other evidence challenges key parts of the boys' evidence, unsettling even the most sympathetic jurors.

As the focus shifts to Daniel's brother Luke, the jurors face a difficult question: was he the ringleader or is his brother turning against him to save himself?

After heated disagreements, the jury come to their verdict; are the brothers guilty of murder or of manslaughter? And is it the same verdict as the real-life case?