While doing some research on a dark era of American history called "Prohibition," I came across an amusing anecdote and thought it worth sharing.
According to a New York Times article on January 7th, 1928, a jury had been empaneled in Los Angeles to hear a bootlegging case. That case soon evolved into a second one after the jurors were charged with drinking the evidence in the original case. According to those fine citizens serving on the jury, they had been doing their job by sampling the evidence in order to determine whether it contained alcohol or not. The careful jurors eventually determined that the evidence did indeed contain alcohol, but by the time they reached that decision, all of the booze had been consumed - leaving the defendant to be acquitted due to a lack of evidence.
Jury duty has never paid well, but it's comforting to know that occasionally it comes with a benefit package!