Case Study 12 Angry Men
PROC 5840 Negotiations
KaShawna M. Davis
Brief list of the major case issues that are instrumental in deciding the jury conclusion. Below I have defined the major case issues that are instrumental in deciding the jury: The defendant left his house at 8:00 P.M. after being “punched” several times by his father. The defendant went to a neighborhood “junk shop” and bought a switchblade knife with a “very unusual carved handle and blade.” The defendant met some friends in front of a tavern about 8:45 that night and talked with them for almost an hour. The defendant’s friends described the “death weapon” in court as the “very same knife” that the defendant had that night. The defendant arrived home around 10:00 P.M. The defendant said that he went to a movie at about 11:30 P.M., returning home at 3:10 in the morning “to find his father dead and himself arrested.” The defendant claimed that the knife fell through a hole in his pocket on the way to the movies and that he never saw it again. No one saw him go out of the house, or at the theatre, nor could the defendant recall the names of the movies he saw. An old man living beneath the boy and his father testified that he heard upstairs a fight, the boy shouts, “I’m gonna kill you,” a body hitting the ground, and then the old man said he saw the boy running down the stairs. Another witness, a woman living across the street took the stand and testified that she saw the boy kill his father through the window of a passing elevated train. In conclusion, the boy has a broad list of prior offenses, including attempting to cut another teenager with a knife.
Jury Member No. 8, Character played by Henry Fonda. Address the following three (3) questions in a minimum of six (6) pages: a) how would you describe his negotiations approach? b) There are at least forty (40) Negotiations techniques defined and discussed in the course text. Please identify at least ten (10) that Juror No. 8 used during this movie. Also, clearly describe the circumstance where in the movie he used such technique(s). Then describe the result from its use. c) Identify at least two (2) compromises that he had made? Explain what they were and the effective result of each. I would define Jury No. 8’s negotiation approach as one that stayed calm and with persistence. One of the most crucial components in Juror Number 8’s ability to convert his fellow jurors was merely persistence. Juror No. 8 came under tons of pressure to collapse, simply put Juror No. 8 didn’t. His content to instantly acquiesce to the demands of his fellow jurors, nevertheless, was amalgamated with a great deal of humbleness. Juror No. 8 did not imperil or reprimand his fellow jurors. In lieu, he handled the other jurors with respect, his actions and questions depicted the problem as one that the jurors could figure out together by establishing a reciprocal agreement. Yet he remained open to being converted to a guilty verdict. Even in the boldness of exceedingly hostile disputes, Juror Number 8 did not react, he responded. By that I mean he did not descend into the emotions of blundering out a counter whenever someone else made an accusatory, abrasive, or emotional statement. Frequently, at first, he kept quiet. When Juror No. 8 spoke it was in a reply that defended his strategy not a reaction to the emotion that had just been conveyed. His response was in the context of his argument. In lieu of cross-accusing, or emotionally challenging his antagonists, Juror Number 8 returned to the subject of his debate. There are ten negotiating techniques that Jury No. 8 used are: Don’t be afraid to ask for what you want- a Not Guilty verdict Shut up and listen- Juror No. 8 stayed calm even when provoked Do your homework- Juror No. 8 purchased the exact same knife to show that it was not a one of a kind Always be willing to walk away- Juror No. 8 requested a...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document