Preview

Jhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
330 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Jhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
aises another question of why the boy would return home, several hours after his father had been murdered, if he had been the one to murder him. 4th Juror suggests that he left the knife in a state of panic and then decided to come back for it later, but 11th Juror challenges this by reminding him that the fingerprints had been wiped off the knife, suggesting that the murderer left calmly. There is more question over the accuracy of the witnesses, and an argument breaks out. 8th Juror calls for another vote. This time, 5th, 8th, 9th, and 11th vote “not guilty,” and the deliberation continues.
After a brief argument, 8th Juror brings into question whether or not the downstairs neighbor, an old man who had suffered a stroke and could only walk slowly, could have gotten to the door to see the boy run down the stairs in fifteen seconds, as he had testified. 8th Juror recreates the floor plan of the apartment, while 2nd Juror times him, and they conclude that he would not have been able to reach his door in fifteen seconds.
3rd Juror reacts violently to this, calling it dishonest, saying that this kid had “got to burn.” 8th Juror calls him a “self-appointed public avenger” and a “sadist,” and 3rd leaps at him. Restrained by the other men, he shouts, “God damn it! I’ll kill him! I’ll kill him.” 8th Juror asks, “You don’t really mean you’ll kill me, do you?” proving his earlier point about how people say, “I’ll kill you,” when they don’t really mean it.
--- Analysis of Act One (Part 2) ---
In this section, the play begins to divide its jurors into three categories. First, 8th Juror stands alone as fighting for the boy. Now, one may include 9th Juror in this, as he does quickly become an advocate for the boy, after hearing a few of 8th Juror's arguments. Second, there are jurors who do presume the

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • 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
  • Good Essays

    These details will prove the boy is censurable. During the play, juror number eight pushes the jury to rule the boy as inculpable. The first thing he confutes is the uniqueness of the knife. He verbalizes that there are multiple knives identical to the one that the father was killed with.…

    • 555 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    His words, ’there are facts for you’, ‘you can’t refute facts’ and his listing of reasons why he thinks the boy is guilty are persuasive to other jurors and the audience as well. Nevertheless, as the play goes on, the 3rd juror starts to be blindfolded by his aggressive feelings about his own son, making his opinion extremely bias and he even uses threatening language, ‘ let go of me, god damn it! I’ll kill him!’ ‘I’m telling you now!’ to force others agree with him. His shouting towards 8th juror, ‘The nerve! The absolute nerve!’ and also his bad behavior make others feel antipathetic towards…

    • 583 Words
    • 3 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

    Throughout his play, Rose critiques the oppressive and discriminative environment of McCarthyist America, exploring the way some jurors use the power of their personality to attempt to sway others to share their point of view. Indeed, the 8th juror is aware of the effects and dangers of peer pressure and this is illustrated through his request to have the second (and possibly the most important vote) taken as an anonymous ballot (p.18) At various moments in the play, the 10th, 3rd and 7th jurors do try to sway the vote to ‘guilty’ through the use of intimidation rather than argument. What can be interpreted is another clear message conveyed by Rose through his play is that this type of intimidation will ultimately be unsuccessful. Logic and reason do win out over endemic prejudice, but what the play also illustrates is that for this to occur, there must be voices who are prepared to hold true to their convictions. This is clearly portrayed through the contrast between the “[interrupting]” and “[shouting]” of jurors 10 and 3 and the “[calm]” and reflective “[pauses]” of juror…

    • 1486 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Okay, Juror #3 is the angry father, and Juror #8 is the guy who stands alone in the INNOCENT vote, right?…

    • 1927 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful 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
  • Good Essays

    The various conflicts in Rose’s play are tools which he uses to teach us to do the right thing, even when we are the minority in a situation. Juror Eight is a quiet, thoughtful, gentle man who sees all sides of every question and always seeks the truth. For example, in the beginning of the play they decide…

    • 596 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Eyewitness In 12 Angry Men

    • 1026 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The film 12 Angry Men is about a murder trial conducted in a courtroom. The judge gave the jury its final instruction telling them that a guilty verdict will result in a death sentence for the defendant, an 18-year-old boy who was accused of murdering his father using a knife! One juror had a personal connection with the case. He has not seen his son for more than two years. He claims that the young boy is guilty and that all young kids are criminals. The juror has bias towards the trial because he see his son in the young boy. Out of the twelve jurors, eleven jurors voted for conviction. Another juror states that he has doubts about the case and hopes to give the boy a favorable decision. The young boy had a hard life living in the slum. A third juror claims that each of the…

    • 1026 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 892 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Explanation: This is inductive reasoning, in this phrase the 6th juror talk straight to the 8th juror who is in favor of the guilty boy. So the first part indicates the specific state and then he asked that if he didn’t do it, who else has motive? This part indicates that this sentence goes toward the general.…

    • 892 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men Essay

    • 836 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The movie "12 Angry Men" focuses on a jury's decision on a capital murder case. A 12-man jury is sent to begin decisions on the first-degree murder trial of an 18-year-old Latino accused of stabbing his father to death, where a guilty verdict means an automatic death sentence. The case appears to be open-and-shut: The defendant has a weak alibi; a knife he claimed to have lost is found at the murder scene; and several witnesses either heard screaming, saw the killing or the boy fleeing the scene. Eleven of the jurors immediately vote guilty; only Juror No. 8 (Mr. Davis) casts a not guilty vote. At first Mr. Davis' bases his vote more so for the sake of discussion after all, the jurors must believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. As the movie unfolds, the story quickly becomes a study of the jurors' complex personalities and how they deal with argumentation within groups and critical thinking. This allows Mr. Davis to try and convince the other jury members that the defendant might not be guilty by using cooperative argumentation, claim, evidence, warrant, facts, etc.…

    • 836 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

    Juror 3 is the last to change his note because of his grudge against kids this grudge started him and his son had a fight and his son left home ever since juror 3 has had prejudice against kids, when juror 3 says “That goddamn rotten kid. I know him. What they’re like. What they do to you. How they kill you everyday. My God, don’t you see? How come I’m the only one who sees? Jeez, I can feel that knife going in.” this proves that juror 3 thinks he knows every kid in the whole world and knows that they are disrespectful and unthankful. In other words prejudice. When he says “Jeez, I can feel that knife going in” this shows that he is so shore of the boy committing the crime even thou the boy was found innocent in the end, showing that prejudice did lead juror 3 away from the truth there for proving the point that prejudice does obscure the truth.…

    • 518 Words
    • 3 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

    Set in the sweltering summer of 1954, Reginald Rose's socially insightful play "Twelve Angry Men", illustrates the dangers of a justice system that relies on twelve individuals to reach a "life or death" decision with collective states of minds hindered by "personal prejudice". At the conception of the play, rose explores the idea that doubt is a harder state of mind than certainty by portraying doubt, in the guilt of the boy, as a minority view within the courtroom. However, as the play progresses a seed of doubt is planted and the importance of self prejudice hindering the verdict is removed, making it harder for the jurors to hold their certainty in their guilty verdict.…

    • 740 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics