Each juror, with the exception of #8, enters the jury room with an individual prejudice. Whether it arises from a personal experience which has exhausted the individual, stereotypical behaviour, selfishness, arrogance, or mere indifference, each juror brings a preconceived belief of the defendant into that jury room. “Juror number 4 based his decision based on the fact that the boy on trial grew up in the slum. Juror number 4 said, “He was born in a slum. The slum is a breeding ground for criminals. I know it and so do you. It’s no secret that children from slum backgrounds are menaces to society.” While Juror number ten just doesn’t like the boy bases on his race. Throughout the entire movie, he referred to the boy as them.”
Described as thoughtful and gentle, Juror #8 is usually portrayed as the most heroic member of the jury. He is devoted to justice, and is initially sympathetic toward the 18-year-old defendant. When every other juror has voted guilty he is the only one to vote: “not guilty.” Juror #8 spends the rest of the play urging to practice patience. “Juror number eight did not exercise reverse discrimination. But juror number 9 did. He favored the old man and made all the other jurors believe that he was just an old man and he just wanted attention. He compared him to himself and convinced the others to give him sympathy.”
In my opinion, I think that this trial should have been a hung jury. I just wasn’t convinced that jurors numbers one, seven and twelve were honest on their vote towards the end. Even juror number seven changed his vote because he said that no one wanted to change their minds sometime during the middle. “the very end……………….
The most persuasive pieces in favor of the defense was that the old man wouldn’t have taken fifteen seconds to get to his front door from his bedroom. Especially because of the stroke he got the year before that caused something to his left leg. Another piece of evidence was that the woman didn’t have her...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document