Preview

12 Angry Men

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
344 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
12 Angry Men
12 Angry Men

A persons surroundings can influence him. In "12 Angry Men" by Reginald
Rose a young mans life is held by twelve men with contrasing views. Eight a caring man, who wishes to talk about why the other jurors think that the boy is guilty, clashes with Three, a sadistic man who would pull the swith himselfto end the boys life. Accroding to Rose, several elements can infulence a jury's verdict, such as the emotional make-up of individual jurors.

Many elements can change a jurors decision. Juror Three, who is convincd that the boy is guilty, is allied with Four who is eventually convicedEights showing of how the two testimonies given by the old woman and old man are lies, votes guilty. Three outraged by this exclames "A guilty man's gonna be walking the streets... he's got to die! Stay with me." (23) But Four sees the truth that
Eight has brought into th light and still votes guilty. Eight tries to convince
Three how the boy is not guilty beyond reasonable doubt but Three does not listen and would rather see the boy die. "For this kid, you bet I'd pull the switch."(17) This shows how emotionally unstable Three is. He is a grown man living in a civilized community and would like to see a boy who he does not even know die by his own hands Eight does not think highly of Three for what he says about killing the boy and shouts "your a sadist."(17) which is the absolute truth about Three.

The emotional make-up of a juror can change his desicision on wther or not to let a man live or die. When someone is asked judge someone else, shoud not you look at al the facts to be sure beyond a shoadow of a doubt that the man who cimmitted the crime is guilty? Yes, a juror should look at all the facts but some do not, they just judge the person on how that person

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    He believes that Juror 8 and Juror 9’s input is driven by biases that are “a bit far-fetched” (Act I, page 32). However, Juror 8, as the center of the discussion, constructively points out certain aspects of the case the makes Juror 4 skeptical about Juror 8’s statements. For example, when Juror 8 wonders how long it takes for an elevated train to pass a given point, Juror 4 inquisitively states, “All right. Say ten Seconds. What are you getting at?” (Act I, page 34). This conveys that he understands that Juror 8 has a point to make, but his intentions are not truly rational in accordance with the facts. Furthermore, Juror 4 claims “You’ve made some excellent points. The last one… was very persuasive. But I still believe the boy is guilty of murder. I have two reasons. One: the evidence given by the woman across the street who actually saw the murder committed. Two: the fact that the woman described the stabbing…” (Act II, page 66). According to Juror 4, the woman’s claim makes logical sense. Although Juror 4 is not yet convinced that the young man is not a murderer, he does value Juror 8’s…

    • 1257 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men is a book written by Reginald Rose and takes place late one hot summer afternoon in the jury-room of a New York Court of law. The story revolves around a Jury that is trying to judge a murder trial. The 12 jurors must decide whether the defendant is guilty or not. The power of persuasion does not only influence characters in the book, but also persuades us to rethink, ‘Should something be changed in the judicial system?’…

    • 583 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men Analysis

    • 664 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The first Juror to votes not guilty in the initial vote is the old white man who works as an architect. As when sitting on his office and drawing blueprints for constructing a building, He was very quiet and respectful in the room. He wasn’t convinced that the boy is innocent, but he wants to compare what’s really happened with the testimony’s evidence. At the end of the film he introduces himself to one of the jurors as Davis. He is free of prejudice, and he believes in justice for all. Although in his job he can be sure about the construction material and similar things,…

    • 664 Words
    • 3 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
  • Better Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 892 Words
    • 4 Pages

    3. “I’m going to kill you,” and the kid screamed it out at the top of his lungs. Don’t tell me he didn’t mean it. Anybody says a thing like that the way he said it, they mean it.…

    • 892 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    A final piece of evidence comes from the murder weapon, which the boy admits he bought; the prosecution states that the switch knife is incredibly unique and is not sold in any of the nearby areas. However, a juror is able to find an identical knife sold in the same area, which once again proves there is a reasonable doubt in the case. Throughout the play it is made apparent that the defense for the boy was lacking, and they did not strike many of the necessary possible jurors during voir dire. For instance, Juror 10 is a complete bigot who believes anyone who comes from a poor area, like the boy, is not trustworthy. In the play the jurors unanimously decide on a not guilty verdict based on the untrustworthy evidence. After their hours of careful discussion, it is clear that their decision was not made hastily, which once again shows that the lacking defense led to the appearance of guilt. In this fictional case, many jurors pushed for a hung jury, however, ultimately it was decided that evidence made possibility for reasonable doubt, and delivered a not guilty…

    • 450 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 1230 Words
    • 5 Pages

    juror’s assume he is guilty on the first vote. But luck for the boy is that the 8th juror who wants it to be a…

    • 1230 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 1063 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In today’s fast-paced world we often find ourselves making hasty, split-second decisions on the seemingly unimportant matters with which we are faced. According to The Critical Thinking Handbook “...critical thinking evaluates reasons and brings thought in line with...” our best sense of what is true enabling us come to insightful conclusions on which we base our actions. In Twelve Angry Men a group of twelve ordinary citizens are faced with an important choice whose consequence is the fate of a sixteen-year-old boy accused of killing his father. Initially deemed an open-shut-case, throughout the play we witness the jurors, under the direction of Juror 8, slowly break down the evidence and testimony on which they later base their final verdict. Each juror with his unique approach to reasoning raises important arguments, suggesting both the innocence and guilt of the accused and further adding to the complexity of the case. In Twelve Angry Men, three pieces of evidence that proved crucial in shifting the jury in favor of acquittal were the murder weapon, the old man’s testimony, and that of the woman who claimed to have seen the murder from across the street.…

    • 1063 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 563 Words
    • 3 Pages

    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 to comprehend because it includes more detail than Rose’s original play version of Twelve Angry Men. Friedkin goes more in depth in his version of the story unlike Rose. Its more effective to the reader because of the message its telling us.…

    • 563 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 261 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Josiah Bont- to what degree should he be excused given his own history of abuse (200 words)…

    • 261 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages

    This was a meeting of 12 jurors to deliberate the fate of an eighteen year old boy. The meeting was more of a verbal structure. The jury foreman was the team leader of the meeting. I feel as though the beginning of the meeting started strong with his decision of voting for guilty or innocence that lead to a hung jury. There was no planning really or discussing the trial at the beginning, and the jurors did not work together in a timely manner. The presentation of evidence was to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the teen was either guilty or innocent. A closer look at the evidence presented brought good points as to why the boy was innocent. The example in which the knife was used, the question being brought up about if the teen really lost the knife used to kill his father before going to the movies was even possible, or did he really even go to movies were all valid points that needed to be revisited. Also the demonstration of the elderly man being able to make it to the door in fifteen seconds to see if the person going down the stairs the man’s son or someone else clearly helped to head the meeting in a different direction. Along with the demonstration it was discovered that the elderly man would not have been able to hear clearly with the noise from noise from the L train. Most important of all was the question of the lady across the railroad tracks in another apartment really sees the murder take place while the L train was passing in ten seconds without her eyeglasses. All these points helped to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the boy was innocent. Finally all the jurors agreed on a not guilty plea and presented it to the judge.…

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The American jury system, wherein citizens are judged by their peers, is one of the most democratic in the world. Nonetheless our system is far from perfect. There are many dangers in a system in which humans are asked to make decisions that could mean life or death for another person. Bias ranks amongst these dangers for it can affect the way jurors interpret testimonies and facts. Indifference is another factor; it too, can heavily affect a juror’s thinking. Personal feelings and experiences can stand in between a juror and the attainment of truth. The American jury system is intrinsically flawed in that it relies on intrinsically flawed humans to make life or death decisions…

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Research Paper

    • 919 Words
    • 4 Pages

    We humans live in a world were illogical fallacies run rampant. In 12 Angry Men the author illustrates everyday illogical fallacies people have in the setting of a court jury. Jurors: 3, 4, 7 and 10 have their own fallacies that are unique to them in the play; but can be found in common people in everyday people.…

    • 919 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Jurors 9 and 11 are crucial in supporting juror 8’s quest for justice. Juror 8 is able to acknowledge that the real truth may never be known, but he would rather, if there was any doubt, see a guilty man live rather than an innocent man die. Juror 8’s calm, reasoned delivery of facts and his ability to refute some of the evidence means that other jurors start to realise that a fair verdict means letting go of their preconceived notions and prejudices about the defendant and his background, ‘No one can really know, but we have reasonable doubt, and this is a safeguard that has enormous value in our system’. Like juror 3, Juror 9 is able to view the defendant objectively without letting prejudice cloud his judgement, ‘I don’t think the kind of boy he is has anything to do with it’. Juror 11 takes a similar rational and sensible approach to the likes of jurors 8 and 9 establishing that he is ‘simply asking questions’ and that ‘we [meaning the jurors] have a responsibility’ to uphold, not abuse. Juror 3’s blinded focus on discovering the truth (manipulated by his predetermined ideas) restricts him from passing a fair verdict on the defendant. Juror 3’s overlook of the case is tarnished as he mirrors his broken relationship with his son to the defendants and…

    • 534 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 862 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Juror #8's point was that he had no substantial evidence to prove that he knew the boy was not guilty, but he had enough doubt to make the claim. Since the rest of the jurors had their minds focused in "guilty-mode", the secondary tension arrives to disrupt their substantive…

    • 862 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics