12 Angry Men I believe in the beginning the 2 main jurors who were basing their decisions on prejudice were mainly Jurors #3 and #10. Juror #3 more based on prejudices of young men‚ particularly because he had such a horrendous relationship with his own son‚ I feel like this case really hit him close to home and really affected him in a personal way. I believe he let his feelings got in the way of his logical thinking and was practically projecting the anger he had towards his son towards the
Premium Jury Discrimination Thought
The movie twelve angry men was a movie about different people from backgrounds‚ races‚ and religions. They were all different and being in a group dynamics class we learned about how personality affects people and other things that people tend to do. The judge in the beginning of the movie showed some non verbal behavior‚ which is sending a message without using words but things like facial expressions and body movements. The judge in the beginning was hunched over meaning he was not very alert
Premium Psychology Jury Cognition
25-Mar-13 Ghufran Ul Haque 12 Angry Men Inductive and Deductive reasoning with short explanation * Inductive Reasoning: 1. The boy had a motive for the killing‚ you know‚ the beating ad all. So if he didn’t do it then who did? Who else had the motive? 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
Premium Inductive reasoning Abductive reasoning Scientific method
In 12 Angry Men the movie it can be observed the different methods of influence that a person uses to impact the behaviors of others. This is a case in which a decision was apparent to be reached easily‚ all the jurors would presume the defendant guilty of murdering his father‚ but only one takes an exception and votes as not guilty. It is necessary that all jurors vote unanimously for a verdict to be reached‚ and when juror #8 votes non-guilty‚ he forces all jurors to discuss the case. All jurors
Premium Verdict Not proven Question
Tyler Streets Dr. Lipson Organizational Behavior 200 01 November 2009 “12 Angry Men” Analysis By the sound of it‚ you would think “12 Angry Men” would be a football game‚ but a lot can be said for a jury proceeding and this movie does a great job of showing that. Twelve different men with twelve different personalities are locked in a room until they can unanimously agree to a verdict‚ a decision whether to put an 18 year old boy to death for a murder charge‚ or let him go free. When they enter
Premium Henry Fonda Psychology Man
at least three examples I saw values and beliefs from one extreme to the other. Example 1 – It was automatically assumed‚ by juror 10‚ that because the defendant lived in the ‘slums’ he was violent and guilty. His personal beliefs affected his vote instead of the facts and evidence. He seem to value social status and beliefs more than the truth. Example 2 – Juror 3 made reference to his own son and how he has not seen him in 3 years. When he voted‚ he seems to vote about his own personal life
Free Jury Not proven Verdict
The 1957 film Twelve Angry Men serves as an excellent example demonstrating sources of power and influence tactics in leadership. At the start‚ the Foreman of the Jury sits at the head of the table and assigns each juror a number. He is using a legitimate source of power because he holds the position title and serves as a formal authoritative figure for the jury. The Foreman also facilitates the initial voting and discussion on the reasons why each jury member felt that way. The jury was almost unanimous
Premium Jury Leadership Emotion
12 Angry Men Adeshola Adewale Juror #1 Juror number one uses Formal Reasoning. He first uses this when he calls for an initial vote amongst the other jurors to see where the votes stand. This is considered formal reasoning because he used a procedure that would get a guaranteed solution‚ being everyone’s decision. Juror one also uses mental laziness. He never states a clearly formed opinion about his decision of not guilty or guilty. He relies on other to state their opinions so he can fly under
Premium Critical thinking Cognition John Cavil
Twelve Angry Men 1.How do you think you might have acted as a juror in this case ? How would you had interacted ? I think i would have started off with being calm but stressed i mean I would probably feel very burdened‚ because just by choosing one option you can change someones life. And as fas as interacting goes i would be casual but if something unexpected happens and i do have an outburst then it happens every one loses it at some point. 2.At the beginning of this movie the jurors vote
Premium Not proven Jury Murder
situations http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/JuryService/JurorQualificaitons.aspx 4. What qualifications does a juror need to have in order to serve on a jury? Qualifications were you have to be a United States citizen‚ at least 18 years of age‚ resides primarily in the judicial district for one year‚ be adequately proficient in English to satisfactorily complete the juror qualification form; have no disqualifying mental or physical condition; not currently be subject to felony charges punishable
Premium Jury