12 Angry Men Final Paper
This paper will review the movie "12 Angry Men" and how the jurors reacted and responded to the facts surrounding the case of murder. This case is set in the 1950's when opinion of individuals were based on skin color, religion and race. Personal preference also played a major role in the decision process. In this case a son was being accused of stabbing his father to death; he was a "foreigner", he was seventeen and he was on trial against 12 angry men.
The emergence of conflict in the movie was due to the nature of the jury's different cultural background, social standing and personal preference. Conflict began when the jurors agreed to vote on rather or not the defendant was guilty and came up one vote shy of a unanimous decision. A man played by Henry Fonda believed that no one's life should stand trial without fully evaluating all the facts of the case at hand. Fonda wanted to be sure about the decision being made and began to assessing the facts of the case before allowing someone to be found guilty when reasonable doubt was present in his mind.
Each juror held a personal reason as to why they felt the defendant was guilty. The reasoning ranged from personal prejudice, racial prejudice and no trust for teens, cultural differences , stereotyping the facts from the prosecutors perspectives and witnesses; however the key factor that one of the jurors who remained bitter to the very end stood his grounds on personal prejudice against the kids.
Some of the triggering events started when the juror's couldn't come to a unanimous decision. Frustration began due to the nature of the juror's readiness to leave and get on with their daily lives, although they were not taking the defendants life into consideration. Some of the jurors began to get confused and filled with anger with one another when some began to have a change of heart once Fonda began the negotiation...