I’m just some idiot on the internet who doesn’t know what I’m talking about, but…
Is it possible this isn’t a mistake? If you’re going to try to win a trial through corruption and wrongdoings, it seems easier to illicitly win over (and have it stay quiet) one person than half of a jury, no?
That's their play, they don't want a jury because they're trying to pay the groundwork for a mistrial via judicial bias but that is a high jump and they're stumbling on molehills.
The jury has to be unanimous no matter the decision. If they can't agree, they either deliberate as long as it takes, or if the jury is hung, then they'll reduce the charges.