Preview

Twlve Angry Men

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
4129 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Twlve Angry Men
Twelve Angry Men – Analysis Questions
Act one, Pg 1-13 1. What is the setting of the drama and what is its significance?
The story is set in the jury room in New York City. The significance is to emphasize the drama but to specifically illustrate how the 12 Jurors become irritated by one another due to the confined spaced and heated arguments that symbolically occur. 2. What are the judge’s instructions to the jury? What is the charge against the defendant?
The Jurors are asked to “…try and separate the facts from the fancy… [and to] deliberate honestly and thoughtfully. If there is a reasonable doubt – then [they] must bring… a verdict of not guilty. If, however, there is no reasonable doubt, then… [they must] find the accused guilty. The verdict must be unanimous… and the death sentence is mandatory in this case.” The charge against the defendant is murder in first degree – premeditated homicide. 3. Discuss the emerging roles for the individual jurors, and evaluate the effectiveness of the foreman.
Juror one seems to take charge and wants to get the case over with. Juror two seems to be very shy and timid and avoids conflict by drinking water as an escapist technique. Juror 3 seems to very negligent and narrow-minded. This is evident in the quote “did you ever hear so much talk about nothing?” which is said momentarily after the trial, illustrating his personal bias on the case. Juror 4 wants to “stick to the facts” and base the discussion on evidence only. Juror 5 seems to have no role in the case, playing a quiet and oblivious character. Juror 6 doesn’t have a lot to say regarding the case and seems to play an unimportant role in the discussion of the trial. Juror 7 seems to be very narrow minded, regarding the case as “a waste of time” and has an important role as a biased character. Juror 8 seems to very considerate and wants to give the defendant a chance as no one else will bother to. Juror 9 plays a quiet role in the discussion, although

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    1. Juror #1 is easily frustrated and gets uptight when someone disobeys his authority. He was concerned with maintaining his control and keeping the proceedings formal.…

    • 336 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    COMMLAW LAW ASSIGNMENT

    • 653 Words
    • 3 Pages

    3. From your observations and from what you have learned in class would you say that the processes and procedures used by the courts are a good way to arrive at the “truth”? Explain, with reference to specific examples, from the trial you watched. If you don’t think the process is a good way to arrive at the “truth”, please provide possible alternatives.…

    • 653 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    This is a jury trial analysis paper in which I am to identify and discuss the steps in a jury trial. I will also discuss the constitutional rights that are enacted during jury trial. I will examine and discuss the selection of a fair and unbiased jury. There are seven steps in a jury trial and I will discuss them all throughout my paper.…

    • 920 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    “In the event you find the accused guilty, the bench will not entertain a recommendation for mercy. The death sentence is mandatory in this case” (Act 1, page 6). That is the last two sentences twelve jurors record into their hearing of the Judge's voice. Once…

    • 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
  • Good Essays

    In the drama Twelve Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, there are twelve jurors to discuss and deliberate if the murder in the first degree is guilt or not. Because the verdict must be unanimous, twelve jurors have a critical thinking in their discussion and finally made the vote from eleven jurors vote for guilty to unanimous vote for not guilty. During the development of the voting, Juror Three is hardly to persuade because he has a serious prejudice to the murder. If Juror Three does not admit the murder is not guilty, they cannot settle a lawsuit. Therefore, Juror Three’s prejudice should be the key to get the final verdict.…

    • 653 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men Flaws

    • 1116 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Also juror number 1 had some character flaws too. Juror number 1 was the foreman and he was very relaxed and lacks intelligences, but most importantly he is very obedient. In the description of jurors for one says “Not overly bright”(The script) When the jurors go to the jury room and after everyone's gets settled in and down, he says “I’m not going to make any rules,” which sounds like he does not really care and relaxed (The script). Juror 1 gets talked over a lot and not taken serious by the others jurors, which makes him obedient to majority of the group. Well as juror number 3 is way different than juror number 1, he lacks moral courage, sadists and very opinionated. In his description it says that he is “extremely opinionated and detected a streak of sadism”(The script). Some things he say such as: “ We don’t need sermon” to juor 9, way he talks about his own kid “Rotten kid,” after juor 9 explains about the old man eyewitness and “Well, that’s the most fantastic story I’ve ever heard” (The script). Juror 3 is really rude and making his own feelings on what happen to his own son's relationship get away from the real…

    • 1116 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Biased testimony towards the defendant resulted in a prejudice jury. Very frequently, statements like ‘We heard the facts, didn’t we?’ or ‘Pay attention to the facts’ are expressed in the jury room. The 4th Juror cited that the murder weapon was a knife so unique that ‘the storekeeper who sold it to him identified the knife in court and said it was the only one of its kind he ever had in stock.’ The 8th Juror argues that ‘It’s possible that the boy lost the knife and that someone else stabbed his father with a similar knife.’ None of the Juror’s believes this possibility as they have already established their prejudices against the accused. The 10th Juror says ‘Let’s talk facts. These people are born to lie… They think different. They act different.’ These are not ‘facts’ but prejudice opinions made by the 10th Juror about the socio-economic status of the boy. It can assumed that the ‘facts’ presented in this case can be viewed as biased opinions and reports that impairs the true facts.…

    • 853 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Now you can see the differences between Jurors Three and Eight. These two jurors are very different , especially when it comes to their personalities. Despite their differences they do have some similarities, which are stated in this essay. After reading this paper, you should better understand these two very different, but similar…

    • 293 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    2nd exam review

    • 904 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Jury or judge has to find the person guilty of the crime and that the jury has no reasonable doubt the defendant is guilty…

    • 904 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    each juror has there own deficiencies or less than ideal qualities, these emerge through their interactions with eachother or their attitudes towards their trial. juror 10 is predjudice regularly using stereotypes to condemn the defendsant without actually considering if what he is saying is true. such as ‘a very big drinker’ or a born liar’ the third juror is guilty of stereotyping the defendant based on age, and he defends his opinions and stereotypes violently in the jury room, such as his near attack on 8th juror at the end of the first act. the play does not let a single character escape unflawed. even 8th juror,…

    • 559 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 261 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Juror 7 is disappointing because he selfishly wants to go to the ball game. Initially he believes that the judgement will be made rapidly and he becomes increasingly frustrated when it is evident that the vote won’t be unanimous. The disappointing aspect is that he has a voice but lacks any reasoning, dismissive of logic in preference to a speedy outcome. Some may suggest that he is simple, but he is so caught up in his own world that he refuses to see or acknowledge the emotional needs of others. He may well offer chewing gum to those around, but the reality is he has no real concern for the needs of others. He is blinded by the immediate, unable to see beyond his own needs. It is disappointing that he is depicted as the man on the street, the knock about bloke off to the ball game who is largely inoffensive. Yet his apathy is offensive as it presents a narrow world where people do not care for others.…

    • 261 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages

    A juror’s verdict can also be shaped by apathy. If a juror does not care about the outcome of a case, there is little chance that he or she will treat his or her verdict with the attention and forethought it deserves. For example, if one examines Juror 7’s quote, the affects of indifference on a juror’s deliberations are clearly shown. “All this…

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Juror #3 came into this trial with a moral dilemma long before hearing the facts of the case. Given his past experiences, he would feel more inclined to vote guilty as to punish and make an example of this boy so that other kids would think twice. In this case if the jury decided on a guilty verdict, the defendant would be put to death. People might make rash decisions based…

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Imagine having to decide a young boy’s fate who is accused of murder in the first degree. This is the case in “Twelve Angry Men”, the prize-winning drama written by Reginald Rose. Some jurors address relevant topics, while others permit their personal “judgments” from thoroughly looking at the case. After hours of deliberation, the jurors reached the decision that the boy is not guilty, due to the fact of reasonable doubt. While few jurors are motivated by their respect and determination for the justice system, Juror 10 is motivated by his personal prejudice.…

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics