Karina Verano Pd. 2B 12 Angry Men 1. Which characters base their decisions on prejudice? Juror number 4 based his decision based on the fact that the boy on trial grew up in the slum. Juror number 4 said‚ “He was born in a slum. The slum is a breeding ground for criminals. I know it and so do you. It’s no secret that children from slum backgrounds are menaces to society.” While Juror number ten just doesn’t like the boy bases on his race. Throughout the entire movie‚ he referred to the boy
Premium Jury John Cavil Samuel Anders
12 Angry Men Mid Term PROC 5840 Directed by: Sidney Lumet Writing credits: Reginald Rose (story and screenplay) Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Cast 3 Major Case Issues 4 Juror #8 5 Juror #4 9 Juror #3 12 References 15 Cast 1957 Actor Juror # Character Description Order of ’not guilty’ vote Martin Balsam 1/The Foreman The jury foreman‚ somewhat preoccupied with his duties; proves to be accommodating to others. An assistant high school football coach
Premium Jury Verdict
Aryaman Thakker 28627 12 Angry Men The movie Twelve Angry Men begins with an eighteen year old boy from the ghetto who is on trial for the murder of his abusive father. A jury of twelve men is locked in the deliberation room to decide the fate of the young boy. All evidence is against the boy and a guilty verdict would send him to die in the electric chair. The judge informs the jurors that they are faced with a grave
Premium Jury Decision making Verdict
X155 Writing Assignment 3 Angie Vargas 3-10-14 “12 Angry Men” In 12 Angry Men directed by Reginal Rose‚ a jury determines the guilt or innocence of a young man who is accused of murder. The jury room is very intense‚ they have little time and their tempers all together tend to click at one time which causes them to argue a lot. Out of the twelve‚ ten jurors have voted to convict. In the film the character that is uncertain is Henry Fondas character. Henry first views the testimony as a pair
Premium English-language films Jury Critical thinking
12 angry men: BLDR Assignment 12 Angry Men: Intellect side of leadership shown in the movie 12 Angry Men is a movie about 12 jury members who meet to decide the fate of a boy accused for murder of his father. The jury members were invited by the court and were assembled in a room to make the decision. The movie starts with initial voting in which odds are in favour of boy being guilty by 11-1. One man among the whole jury thinks that there may be a chance that boy is really innocent and all
Premium Jury Not proven 12 Angry Men
12 Angry Men Sam Block 7 Juror Eight An Argument where it is one versus eleven doesn’t seem to be fair does it. In Twelve Angry Men‚ a young boy from the slums is accused of stabbing his father. It is up to twelve men to decide his fate. Juror Eight was able to sway the vote because he connected with the other jurors on a personal level; he was very patient with everyone‚ listening to what they had to say‚ and used tangible evidence to recreate the crime scene itself in front of the twelve
Premium
Twelve Angry Men In the play Twelve Angry Men by Reginad Rose the twelve jurors have to decide if a young boy is guilty or not guilty. The boy is accused of the murder of his father. His fate lies in the hands of the twelve jurors. Will he get the death penalty? Will they prove that the young boy is not guilty? Will he get to live the rest of his life? There are many different versions of this story including William Friedkins film version produced in 1997. Friedkins film version is easier
Premium Jury Court Judge
12 Angry Men 12 Angry men presented moral dilemma of twelve jurors. The moral dilemma is of justice and prejudice as we see throughout the movie. A moral person does the right thing for the group or society as a whole‚ not just what’s right for themselves or another person at any given time. Juror number 8 creates his own dilemma because he believes that the boy is not guilty. He seeks answers to the dilemma himself by bringing up the uncertainties of case presented in court. He does not turn to
Premium Ethics Morality
thinking. He was instigating fights‚ belittling them when their opinions differed from his own and used his own personal experience with his son as justification for his opinion and actions. Example 2 – Evasion This strategy was used by juror 5. He avoided answering questions when asked and avoided giving his opinion when asked the reason for his vote and only later joined in the discussion when his
Free Jury Not proven Verdict
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
Premium Jury Emotion Murder