12 Angry Men Paper

12 Angry Men Influence Analysis In the movie 12 Angry Men, you will find the power of influence and the effect it can have over a majority audience. Juror #8 who plays the protagonist role, is the only juror that votes not guilty in the initial round of deliberations. Fonda who plays juror #8 is faced with many challenges in trying to convince a room of jurors who feel strongly that the boy is guilty. The setting itself was not the best one, the room was hot, there was no air conditioning, and it was the hottest day of the year. Uncomfortable conditions, and several jurors who hold strong biases from past experiences made it a difficult task for a calm, fair, and rationalized discussion. Fonda who held the only vote for not guilty, remained calm, he did not waver, and held his conviction while the entire room attempted to convince him of their guilty verdict.

Fonda used reason when he pulled out a knife that was identical to the one used in the murder, which at the time been thought of as one of a kind. The knife was the first cue that forced the other jurors to think more rationally. Fonda used the consultation technique by asking the jurors to give the deliberation an hour to talk about it, instead of just sentencing a young boy to the electric chair without discussing it first. Fonda knew he could not change the majority vote on his own, and by using the consultation technique, he attempted to get support from the other jurors. After using the knife to counter the framed thought process of the jurors, he did an exchange with them. Through the use of a private ballot, if any of the 11 jurors voted not guilty, they would continue to discuss it, but if all of them still felt the boy was guilty then he would change his vote. This gamble paid off for Fonda, juror # 9 stood behind him stating that anyone who would stand against ridicule standing alone must have some important point to make.

Fonda, juror# 8, maintains his position using rational