22 April 2013
12 Angry Men
12 Angry Men is a filmed based on the theme of reasonable doubt. A jury of twelve men are chosen to determine whether the eighteen year old boy killed his father or not. The initial evidence that includes two eye witnesses would suggest that this case is a closed decision and they boy will surely be found guilty. The jury does not take long before coming to a vote ending in 11 votes for guilty 1 vote for non guilty. The man who voted for not guilty saw loop holes in the evidence and in turn saw reasonable doubt to vote not guilty. As the movie progresses the jurors discusses ever critical part of evidence, discussing possible alternative to explaining the events. The evidence delivered at the trial, was thought to be justifiable by all but one of the jurors. Than man who opposed the entire jury was the only one who did not assumed that the evidence was the truth and not exaggerated.
One of the more substantial evidence given at the trial was an eye witness by an old man who stated he heard the boy yell at his father saying he was going to kill him, and then ten seconds later run down the stairs and out the building. This was a crucial part of the case against the accused, although no one questioned the old mans ability to relocate these events. The flaw of this was pointed out yet again by the man who voted not guilty. He suggests to reenact the old man who walks particularly slow to decided how exactly he was able to see the boy run out of the apartment. After seeing that it is almost impossible for the old man to get outside his room to see the boy run out, the jury slowly starts to change their votes, due to reasonable doubt.
The second valid eye witness was a women who lived in a building directly opposite the apartment where the father was murdered. The lady claims to have seen the boy kill his father with a knife right as the train between the two buildings went past. She saw it...