Preview

12 Angry Men - 4

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
874 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
12 Angry Men - 4
12 ANGRY MEN In the movie 12 Angry Men, eleven jurors vote to convict a young man of stabbing and killing his own father. Initially, the men are decisive on sending the boy to the death chamber relying solely on the testimony given by the two eyewitnesses. Despite Juror #8 raising questions about the reliability of the eyewitnesses’ testimonies, the majority of the jurors stick by their guilty votes. Juror #8 maintains his not guilty verdict and through the film, continues to raise questions and shows the jurors where there are areas that raise doubt. Although there were only two eyewitness accounts, this movie shows how strong the power of eyewitness testimony can be in court. In addition to the power of eyewitness accounts, this movie displays a great example of group polarization—the process by which the public opinion divides and goes to different extremes. When looking at jurors, a group of individuals, when they are alone and are thinking about the case, may be undecided, become fiercely opinionated once they enter the deliberation room. In this version of the movie, interestingly, Juror #10, played by Mykelti Williamson, a black actor, goes on a racist tyrannical rant about how Hispanics are “born to lie, they are crack heads” and are “multiplying like rabbits” He believes that they are second- class citizens and don’t deserve to be in society. He believes that they are killers by nature and are trying to take over. The eyewitness testimony is profoundly affected by the complex personalities of the jury. For example, Juror #3, the very last man standing, is hung on the words “I’m going to kill you” being said to the boy’s own father and takes on the pain of the murder as his own. He wants the boy to pay for what he did, as he believes that the boy is guilty based on the eyewitness testimony. He has a hard time accepting the reasonable doubt and is the very last one to do so at the close of the movie. Juror #4 is also


References: Group polarization & how it impacts your verdict. (2011, August 25). Retrieved from http://jurorproof.com/2011/08/25/group-polarization-how-it-impacts-your-verdict/ Internet movie database (imbd) [0 series episode]. Retrieved from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118528/ Sunstein, C. (2000, October 4). Deliberative trouble? why groups go to extremes.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    On the other hand, juror 10 is a loud mouthed, racist bigot. He scolds people he doesn’t agree with and a low opinion of people living in slum areas. Juror #10 is the character who brings in the most prejudice to the jury room as he has formed his decision from the moment he saw the young boy and sees no reason for him to waste any time debating on whether the defendant is guilty. His prejudice comes from the fact he used to live in the “slums” and considers people like the defendant to be “trash”. This is established when he states “well take a look at them…you can’t believe a word they say…they act different… they don’t need any big excuse to kill someone. (59) This man is very…

    • 491 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    He believes that Juror 8 and Juror 9’s input is driven by biases that are “a bit far-fetched” (Act I, page 32). However, Juror 8, as the center of the discussion, constructively points out certain aspects of the case the makes Juror 4 skeptical about Juror 8’s statements. For example, when Juror 8 wonders how long it takes for an elevated train to pass a given point, Juror 4 inquisitively states, “All right. Say ten Seconds. What are you getting at?” (Act I, page 34). This conveys that he understands that Juror 8 has a point to make, but his intentions are not truly rational in accordance with the facts. Furthermore, Juror 4 claims “You’ve made some excellent points. The last one… was very persuasive. But I still believe the boy is guilty of murder. I have two reasons. One: the evidence given by the woman across the street who actually saw the murder committed. Two: the fact that the woman described the stabbing…” (Act II, page 66). According to Juror 4, the woman’s claim makes logical sense. Although Juror 4 is not yet convinced that the young man is not a murderer, he does value Juror 8’s…

    • 1257 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The 8th Juror is a key character throughout the play. He is the only dissenter who votes ‘not guilty’ in the very beginning and says ‘it’s not easy to raise hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first.’ As a logical, gentle and thoughtful character, the 8th Juror slowly works out the way to make the jury rethink the case and the possibility of the boy not killing his…

    • 583 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the film Twelve Angry Men produced by Reginald Rose begins when a young teenage boy was on trial for murdering his abusive father. All the evidence and facts brought to the trial was against him, however, the twelve jurors had to make a verdict whether the boy is guilty or not guilty, and they decision would concluded whether the boy should or should not be sent to the electric chair. In process of making a verdict, the twelve jurors came together to reason and decide the fate of the boy. The verdict began with eleven guilty to one not guilty. Juror number 8, who voted not guilty did not believe on the evidence because, he believed that the murder weapon could be available to anyone, so he had purchased a look alike knife. Which made some…

    • 407 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Eyewitness In 12 Angry Men

    • 1026 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The film 12 Angry Men is about a murder trial conducted in a courtroom. The judge gave the jury its final instruction telling them that a guilty verdict will result in a death sentence for the defendant, an 18-year-old boy who was accused of murdering his father using a knife! One juror had a personal connection with the case. He has not seen his son for more than two years. He claims that the young boy is guilty and that all young kids are criminals. The juror has bias towards the trial because he see his son in the young boy. Out of the twelve jurors, eleven jurors voted for conviction. Another juror states that he has doubts about the case and hopes to give the boy a favorable decision. The young boy had a hard life living in the slum. A third juror claims that each of the…

    • 1026 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The generalisations established by certain Jurors, makes them oblivious to the facts before them. Characters rely on generalised stereotypes to support their prejudices against those of a lower-socio economic status. The 10th Juror says to other Jurors ‘the kids who crawl outta those places are real trash’ and the 4th Juror states ‘Children from slum backgrounds are potential menaces to society.’ Neither the 10th nor the 4th Jurors makes reference to specific details of the defendant’s situation, but…

    • 853 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 1445 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men is a classic movie depicting how one determined leader can alter an entire crowd. Through dedication, curiosity, and the pursuit for the truth he is able to persuade a group of twelve to second guess even themselves. Within this heterogynous group are a dozen different personalities - some of which were leaders and most of which were not.…

    • 1445 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men Essay

    • 836 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The movie "12 Angry Men" focuses on a jury's decision on a capital murder case. A 12-man jury is sent to begin decisions on the first-degree murder trial of an 18-year-old Latino accused of stabbing his father to death, where a guilty verdict means an automatic death sentence. The case appears to be open-and-shut: The defendant has a weak alibi; a knife he claimed to have lost is found at the murder scene; and several witnesses either heard screaming, saw the killing or the boy fleeing the scene. Eleven of the jurors immediately vote guilty; only Juror No. 8 (Mr. Davis) casts a not guilty vote. At first Mr. Davis' bases his vote more so for the sake of discussion after all, the jurors must believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. As the movie unfolds, the story quickly becomes a study of the jurors' complex personalities and how they deal with argumentation within groups and critical thinking. This allows Mr. Davis to try and convince the other jury members that the defendant might not be guilty by using cooperative argumentation, claim, evidence, warrant, facts, etc.…

    • 836 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Justice In 12 Angry Men

    • 666 Words
    • 3 Pages

    It’s the hottest day of the year in New York City, and 12 clammy men, who were put on a jury, are locked into a room, where the fan doesn’t work and the windows stick, to discuss the case of an 18 year old accused of murder. In the opening scene, the judge states that is it a first degree murder and if found guilty the teenager will receive the death penalty. The 18 year old is accused of killing his father with a “one of a kind” switch blade. The 12 jurors must decide if there is enough evidence to convict the teen of murder. When the initial vote is taken it is 11-1. The one vote for not guilty is juror eight, whose real name is Davis. He is a well-spoken man, wore a suit and tie and had his dark hair slicked back for the trial. Davis admits that he doesn’t know if the teen is innocent but says he could be. In the movie 12 Angry Men, Juror eight shows true justice…

    • 666 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 1110 Words
    • 5 Pages

    It’s a scary but a true reality that prejudice has the power to overshadow the facts and evidence, which can prevent jurors from seeing the truth. From the start of the play, juror 4 votes the defendant guilty of murder, not based on facts but entirely based on prejudice and stereotyping the defendant. The fact that the defendant “was born in a slum” (p.g 12) and the generalisation from the outside world: “Children from slum backgrounds are potential menaces to society.” (p.g 12) convince juror 4 that the defendant must be guilty. Because of prejudice, he cannot see the details like the defendant’s birthplace and circumstances may potentially be used to prove that he does not have a strong motive. As pointed out by the 8th Juror, the defendant was raised in a slum and had “been hit so many times” (p.g 11) that a few slaps from his father cannot make the defendant commit patricide. Therefore, the defendant does not have a strong motive. When we compare juror 8 and juror4’s reasoning, we can see that prejudice and stereotyping can veil the truth of the case and hide it from jurors and consequently prevent them from seeing the truth. However, juror 4 is only prejudiced at the start of…

    • 1110 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 563 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In Rose’s play version of the story there are more racial issues. The problem in the play is that defendant is black and juror three is very prejudice. Juror three wouldn’t change his vote to not guilty for this very reason. He believed that the defendant was guilty without even talking about what happened that night with the other jurors. All of the jurors in the play version were white. Racial prejudice was very common when this play was written. In Friedkins film version although he showed that the whole story wasn’t focused on the racial prejudice issue. In the film version the jurors were white, black, and Mexican. The defendant in the film version was Mexican as well. In Friedkins version there was still a slight issue with racism, but it wasn’t as obvious as the play version Reginad Rose wrote. Lucky in the play version juror eight had a good heart because he’s the one that wanted to give this young boy a chance. He was trying to persuade everyone that the things that the witnesses were saying weren’t adding up. He didn’t care what color the defendant was he was trying to serve justice. By the end of the play though they all proved to juror three that the defendant was not guilty.…

    • 563 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 261 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Josiah Bont- to what degree should he be excused given his own history of abuse (200 words)…

    • 261 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The American jury system, wherein citizens are judged by their peers, is one of the most democratic in the world. Nonetheless our system is far from perfect. There are many dangers in a system in which humans are asked to make decisions that could mean life or death for another person. Bias ranks amongst these dangers for it can affect the way jurors interpret testimonies and facts. Indifference is another factor; it too, can heavily affect a juror’s thinking. Personal feelings and experiences can stand in between a juror and the attainment of truth. The American jury system is intrinsically flawed in that it relies on intrinsically flawed humans to make life or death decisions…

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Emotion does play a hefty part but facts can overcome any emotions. One of Juror #3’s biggest arguments was the testimony of an old man that lived on the floor below the apartment, where the murder took place. The old man stated in…

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men Response

    • 812 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The setting of 12 Angry Men is a jury deliberation room where the jurors are and required to decide the guilt or innocence of an 18 year old that is accused of committing first-degree murder by stabbing his father with a switchblade knife. Witnesses were presented to give evidence of hearing a quarrel; hearing a threat to kill, and have seeing the boy run away. Another witness swore to having seen the boy stabbing his father from a window across from where the murder occurred. Eleven jurors were convinced the boy was guilty and deserved the death penalty. One raised questions he felt had not been asked or had not been pursued by the defense.…

    • 812 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics