12 Angery Men Moral Dilemma

Good Essays
Twelve Angry Men is a movie about a young boy on trial for murdering his father. If the boy is found guilty, he will be sentenced to death. The jury men are very aware of this fact, most are perfectly fine with sending this boy to die as one man searches for the empathy of his jury peers. One by one the jury begins to sway toward the not guilty plea, as every fact thrown into conversation gets disproved. Now, one lone juror faces not the pressure of his peers but the pressure of his emotional attachment to the case to see that the boy be punished. This finally leads to Juror #3’s inevitable surrender of not guilty.
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 on emotional ties to certain subjects. For some it might be a moral dilemma, like Juror #8, or past experience with a similar situation, like Juror #3. Juror #3 even mentions that kids have no respect for adults these days(12 Angry Men). This clearly shows his state of mind when it comes to youth. I would consider the experience he had with his son very truthful based on the absence of his son in his life now. I think the whole truth can only be found by comparing his side of the story and his sons. However, they aren’t the ones on trial, the boy who murdered his father is. But does Juror #3 see a strange boy in the defendants chair or his own son? You can see that emotions and past experiences can play a large role in a decision making process.
Emotion does play a hefty part but facts can overcome any emotions. One of Juror #3’s biggest arguments was the testimony of an old man that lived on the floor below the apartment, where the murder took place. The old man stated in court

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men is a play about a young boy on trial for murdering his father. If the boy is found guilty, he will be sentenced to death. The jury men are very aware of this fact, most are perfectly fine with sending this boy to die as one man searches for the empathy of his jury peers. One by one the jury begins to sway toward the not guilty plea, as every fact thrown into conversation gets disproved. Now, one lone juror faces not the pressure of his peers but the pressure of his emotional attachment to the case to see that the boy be punished. This finally leads to Juror #3’s inevitable surrender of not guilty.…

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory 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

    Research Paper

    • 919 Words
    • 4 Pages

    His emotional prejudice gets in the way of his critically thinking through the evidence because he has emotional conflict with his own son. He is grouping all teens together because of his altercation with his son, and Juror 3 is just punishing the young man on trial because he cannot come to turns with his own failings as a parent with his child. Towards the end of the play Juror 3 is all alone on the vote count; he “looks around at all of them for a long time. They sit silently, waiting for him to speak, and all of them despise him for his stubbornness. Then, suddenly, his face contorts as if he is about to cry, and he slams his fist down on the table” … (thundering) All right” (30).…

    • 919 Words
    • 4 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
  • 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
  • Satisfactory Essays

    If I was the 18 year old being convicted I would have not liked Juror #8 to use actual evidence and ethical judgement because the evidence provided makes it seem like I did it. For example, the knife provided and the witness would be a major weapon to find me guilty or not. On the other hand, I would have not chosen another juror to make the final decision on my conviction because the others jumped the conclusions too quick and did not think it through how juror #8 did. He looked at every detail and looked at it in different point of views.…

    • 186 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 12 Angry Men by Henry Fonda and Reginald Rose a young man charged with the murder of his father, is in the hands of twelve men all with entirely diverse views. After hearing, the case the jurors go into discussions. Eleven of the twelve men are convinced that the boy murdered his father. However, Juror #8, Davis (Henry Fonda). Doesn’t necessarily believe the boy is guilty, rather wants to explore the evidence and discuss the trial further. Davis, was the most important juror in Twelve Angry Men for a number of reasons. First is that when all the other jurors voted guilty without even thinking about their decisions, Juror #8 suggested that they talk about it for a little bit before jumping to conclusions. When asked if he thought the boy was guilty or not guilty, he said, “I don’t know.” This shows that he hadn’t decided one way or the other. When asked why he voted this way, he replied, “It’s not easy for me to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first.” This shows that he wanted to talk things over with the other jurors before he makes a decision. Even when some of the other jurors got mad and started arguing with him, he stayed composed and tried to work things out in a rational manor. Later on he said, “I just want to talk for a while.” This is more proof that he wanted to discuss the issue. Secondly Juror #8 re-enacted scenes from the night of the murder in order to prove his points. The third reason is that he convinced Juror #9 to change his vote to not guilty. This was a vital step because it added question and doubt to the other jurors and made it acceptable to change their minds as well. This was important because if no one changed his or her decision in the second vote, Juror #8 said he would change his vote to not guilty. However, Juror #9 did change his vote giving Juror #8 more time to talk about the case. Juror #9 said, “He gambled for support and I gave it to him. I want to hear more.” By convincing one…

    • 928 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men Influence

    • 711 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Juror Three’s past negatively influences him to vote guilty despite all the evidence pointing to an acquittal. In Act One, Juror Three talks about his bitterness towards “tough kids”. He goes on and on…

    • 711 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Justice In 12 Angry Men

    • 1869 Words
    • 8 Pages

    12 Angry Men (1957) is the gripping, penetrating, and engrossing examination of a diverse group of twelve jurors (all male, mostly middle-aged, white, and generally of middle-class status) who are uncomfortably brought together to deliberate after hearing the 'facts' in a seemingly open-and-shut murder trial case. They retire to a jury room to do their civic duty and serve up a just verdict for the indigent minority defendant (with a criminal record) whose life is in the balance. The film is a powerful indictment, denouncement and expose of the trial by jury system. The frightened, teenaged defendant is on trial, as well as the jury and the American judicial system with its purported sense of infallibility, fairness and lack of bias. Alternatively, the film could also be viewed as commentary on McCarthyism, Fascism, or Communism (threatening forces in the 50s). One of the film's posters described how the workings of the judicial…

    • 1869 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Juror 9 “woman who testified she saw the killing had these deep marks on the sides of her nose”.…

    • 1675 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    In order for justice to be served discussion must take place, and juror 8 seems to be the only juror who understands the enormity of the situation. From the very beginning Juror 8 realises how serious his role is being a part of a jury; therefore he understands that voting guilty could potentially end a young man’s life. He believes that the accused’s trial deserves some discussion, “it’s just that were talking about someone’s life here. I mean suppose we’re wrong?” Juror 8 is the only character who initially brings reason and logic into the jury room, not prejudice. The other jurors however came into the room filled with prejudice and others were wrapped in their own personal experiences. This is how the conflict starts. Juror 8 understands he must convince the…

    • 804 Words
    • 4 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
  • 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
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 328 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The 3rd juror is the most outspoken about the 'guilt' of the teenager. As the play goes along it is revealed he has a personal connection with what has happened, he feels anger towards his own son, an anger which he has transferred onto the accused. A key moment for the third juror is when he finally changes his vote to ‘not guilty’ which is when he is reminded by the 8th juror “It’s not your boy. He’s somebody else’”, followed by the 4th juror stating “let him live”. Right up to this point, the third juror was committed to his ‘guilty’ vote. By juror 3 allowing his emotional baggage to enter the jury room with him it is clear that from the beginning of the play, his personal experience with his son were physiologically too powerful for him to be able to make the right verdict for the defendant.…

    • 328 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays