Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

Jury and Angriest Juror

Good Essays
899 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Jury and Angriest Juror
Karim Zaky 1
Mrs. Lambert
English II
12/20/2012
Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose explored the theme ‘Power of persuasion’ through jurors’ # Three, Eight, and Nine.
The play is inspired by Reginald Rose’s own experience of jury duty on a manslaughter case in New York City.
Reginald Rose was born in New York City on December 10, 1920 and he worked at a series of odd jobs, including a receiving clerk, window cleaner, and camp counselor He served in the U.S. Army in World War II, completing his tour of duty first lieutenant, he had been reluctant to serve on a jury, he wrote “the moment I walked into the court room…and found myself facing a strange man whose fate was suddenly more or less in my hands, my entire attitude changed.” (Twelve Angry Men, Pg.288,378).
Juror #Eight is such a great man to turn someone’s life upside down and make him survive such a horrible penalty such as death penalty which no one’s get a chance to correct his mistakes no more, or even regret it, because it just ends the life of that person forever.
And all it takes is an approval from the Jurors and the judge and then the case would be kind of closed and then he would be Zaky 2 died that kid will owe Juror #Eight for the rest of his life for giving him a new life, While Juror #Eight is getting criticized by Jurors #Three, Sever, and Twelve but Juror #Eight says that he does not know whether the man is guilty or not but that it is not easy for him to send a boy to his death without discussing the facts of the case.(Twelve Angry Men,P.g290).
And it was the right thing to do and just looking at the case from a three dimensional way and not being selfish and self-centered and just voting for guilty and sending that kid to death penalty and ending his life so easily.
Juror #Eight Also insists that, “during the trial, too many questions were left unasked”. “He asks for the murder weapon to be brought in” and says that “it is possible that someone else stabbed the boy’s father with a similar knife.” (Twelve Angry Men p.g.290). Zaky 3
Juror #Eight was really smart when he replied to the angriest juror which was juror #Two and he says “According to the law, the defendant does not have to demonstrate his innocence. He is innocent until proved guilty. The second element is that the verdict must be unanimous, since unanimity guards against a miscarriage of justice. Third, the defendant can be convinced only in the absence of reasonable doubt on the part of the jury. If there is reasonable doubt, he must be acquitted. The underlying principle is that it is better that a guilty man be set free than an innocent man be convinced." (Twelve Angry Men, P.g379)
It was a real hot day for the jurors inside that closed room and all they had is a fan, because back in that time they did not have air conditioners or any stronger coolers for the room and that stressed a lot of them out making them choose the easy path which is not thinking and just voting for guilty. The dynamics of group behavior simply do not work that way. In the 1950s, a study of 255 trials by the Chicago Jury Project turned up no examples of such an occurrence. The study, in Zaky 4
Which microphones were placed in the jury room to record deliberations, found that thirty percent of cases were decided, either for conviction or acquittal, on the first Ballot. In ninety five perfect of cases, the majority on the first ballot persuaded the minority to their point of view. In the other words, the way a jury first casts its vote preferences is the best predictor of the final verdict. This conclusion has been confirmed by much research in jury behavior over the past half century which includes the play “Twelve Angry Men” (Twelve Angry Men, P.g299)
Juror #Three is almost all the play in one mode that never changed it’s a horrible mode and he is also trying his best to throw stress on everybody he almost got angry at everybody too he got angry at Juror #Four just for saying the only word that he would never know what it really means it’s the word fair. After Juror #3 angrily says “What do you mean? There are no secrets in here! I know who it was. What’s the matter with you? You come in here and you vote guilty and then this slick preacher starts to tear your hear tout with stories about a poor little kid who just couldn’t help becoming a murderer. So you change your vote. If that isn’t the most sickening.” Zaky 5
Foreman stops him and says “Now hold it.” And Juror number four says “I agree with you that the man is guilty but let’s be fair.” (Twelve Angry Men, Act Two, P.g27) And that’s what made Juror #Three furious. Just hearing the word fair. Juror #Eight keeps getting angry but actually he does have his one and only excuse which is Juror #3 has a son. He treated his son much like

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    There are many significant views and values that Reginald Rose demonstrates in 12 Angry Men the most important one being that prejudice constantly affects the truth and peoples judgement. As the jurors argue between themselves as to whether a young boy is guilty of stabbing his father it is shown that “It’s very hard to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this.” This is most evident in the way juror #3 and juror #10 come to their decision that the young man is guilty as they bring in there prejudice against young people and people from the slums to make their judgement without considering the facts of the case. Rose uses juror #8 who can see the whole trial because he is calm, reasonable and brings no prejudice as a prime example of what a juror is supposed to be like.…

    • 865 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In his play, 12 Angry Men, Reginald Rose reveals how the confined space of the jury room is not only hot weather wise but hot because of the heated exchanges and the tension. The descriptive nature of Rose’s writing depicts the immense pressure that the jurors are under and the below par conditions they are given to make a life or death decision for the boy. Rose recognises that even though there may be tension and conflict between jurors that as a combined group will be able to make the correct decision.…

    • 837 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Juror number 8 came with a reasonable argument to the jurors that changes the 9th juror’s perspective. The argument convinces the 9th juror to be an advocate for the boy/support the boy. Even though the 9th juror is convinced and sees the case from a different view than before, the other jurors are still not convinced. The 8th juror makes a tough but smart decision when voting to take time and sit and talk a bit more throught the case to find a conclusion. At first he says that the defendant is not guilty but he then reevaluates his decision and says “i don’t know.”…

    • 105 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory 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
  • Powerful Essays

    12 Angry Men: Overview

    • 1553 Words
    • 7 Pages

    2. The Twelve jurors are given the job, by the judge, of deciding whether a teenage boy is innocent or guilty of killing his father. They must separate the facts from the fancy and provide a verdict of guilty if there is no reasonable doubt to the claims, or non-guilty if there is reasonable doubt. The decision must be unanimous. The charge against the defendant is Murder in the first degree – premeditated homicide (death sentence).…

    • 1553 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Juror 8 simply puts out questions and asks people to challenge their own beliefs. He is prepared to allow anyone to keep their own opinion without compromising his own.…

    • 1927 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the beginning of the play, he is the only person that believes the boy on trial could be not guilty. “There were eleven votes for guilty. It's not so easy for me to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first.” (page 5). This quote from the story shows that juror eight is willing to give the boy’s story a chance and that he deserves a for the jury to at least discuss the trial opposed to them all immediately voting that he is guilty. Throughout the whole play, juror eight tried, not to convince the rest of the jury that he was not guilty, but try to get them to understand that a boy’s life was on the line. He was trying to show them that there was reasonable doubt, by showing the men through demonstrations of what happened (page 20/24) and logical reasoning about simple observations during the trial (page 29). During the whole play, juror number eight brought a theme of…

    • 715 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
  • Powerful Essays

    Juror 3‘s relationship with his estranged son conflicts with the case and how he is intolerant to young kids (ageism) he also believes that a common way of handling conflict in his family has always been with physical violence. Dependence on violence as a problem-solving strategy.…

    • 1675 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    In conclusion, a 16-year-old boy, who was abused by his father for about 13 years, was suspected of the murder of his own father. However, the jurors pointed out that the testimonies are shaky- and possibly they are just lying- and the physical evidences does not prove that the boy stabbed his father. The jurors were all convinced that there is no evidence sufficient to prove that the boy is an actual murderer. Ultimately, they brought and found this boy ‘not…

    • 675 Words
    • 3 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

    1950s America saw the nation fall into a period of national tension and idealogical turmoil following the McCarthy Trials and the Cold War, which produced a flourish of works such as Regnald Rose’s ‘Twelve Angry Men.’ Using a jury of twelve anonymous men, the play scrutinizes both the strengths and flaws of the American judicial system. The case of a fictional “delinquent” who faces capitol punishment under charges of patricide acts as a vehicle to examine the moral dilemma of prejudice and judgement, and its importance, underpinning American jury rooms in a time of profound social division. Through his structuring and characterizations, Rose does not merely attack the system, but contends is functionality stems from the very individuals within it, and their ability to see with objectivity and compassion.…

    • 1096 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good 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
  • Good Essays

    Prejudice: There are many significant views and values that Reginald Rose demonstrates in 12 Angry Men the most important one being that prejudice constantly affects the truth and peoples judgement. As the jurors argue between themselves as to whether a young boy is guilty of stabbing his father it is shown that “It’s very hard to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this.” This is most evident in the way juror #3 and juror #10 come to their decision that the young man is guilty as they bring in there prejudice against young people and people from the slums to make their judgement without considering the facts of the case. Rose uses juror #8 who can see the whole trial because he is calm, reasonable and brings no prejudice as a prime example of what a juror is supposed to be like.…

    • 510 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    As juror 8's campaign continues, and the seed of doubt planted into the "guilty" minded jury members is fertilised thorough the analysing of facts the reasonable doubt slowly grows in the jurors minds, the audience begin to create an understanding that doubt is an easier state of mind…

    • 740 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays