12 Angry Men: Injustice Questions

1519 Words4 Pages

Injustice Seminar Questions Directions: Please answer each of the questions in detail with evidence from text 12 Angry Men. As always, I encourage you to make. real world connections, use personal examples, and to connect to other sources of literature. Make sure your answers are easy to read, are at least 5-8 sentences in length, and contain at least 2 pieces of evidence from the text. This play has been used to teach students about group behavior and the role of individual influence in group settings. What does the play have to offer as a representation of group behavior and the influence that individuals can have in group settings? The play shows the idea that one person can impact other’s beliefs in a group. At the start juror eight was alone in this view of the defendant as not guilty, by the end he had changed the minds of the other eleven men. It also introduces the idea that for an individual’s beliefs to be taken seriously when everyone else has a different view, he should have evidence. In this Juror eight introduced many different ideas about the evidence that would turn them into evidence of guilt instead of evidence of innocence. With each new piece of evidence he changed more minds and eventually the whole …show more content…

From the start everyone is talking to him and he is always one of the jurors who tries to convince those who are in favor of a conviction. He doesn’t back down and his character develops throughout the text, at the start he is timid and by the end he is confident. In addition, it is always juror eight who introduces new ideas that carry the conversation forward. If there was no juror eight, the outcome would have been guilty, simply because he was who convinced everyone that there was a reasonable doubt. There wouldn’t have been a story to tell because no one would have stood up, meaning that juror eight was the cause for this play, which is a sign that he would be the

Show More
Related

  • Justice was Served in the Film Twelve Angry Men

    386 Words  | 1 Pages

    From the beginning of the film, juror number eight displayed his interest in the case, not his personal engagements. His opening part by the window foreshadowed his deep concern for the defendant, an eighteen year-old Hispanic gentleman accused of stabbing his father in a fit of rage. While most of the jurors were ready to leave so as not to further interrupt their schedules, Henry Fonda was willing to give as much time as it would take to analyze this seemingly simple decision.

    Read More

  • How is Scrooge presented in a Christmas Carol

    1341 Words  | 3 Pages

    the play. It looks at the person he is and the person he becomes. It

    Read More

  • Nine Ten by Warren Leight

    658 Words  | 2 Pages

    The major conflict in the play, Nine Ten by Warren Leight is jury duty. The first thing people think when they hear the words “jury duty” is sitting in a courthouse all day and night disagreeing whether a person is guilty or innocent. For most, the immediate thought when getting that letter out of the mailbox is that they do not have time. Their lives are full enough with running the kids to school and to after school activities. Their next thought may be, ‘but I’m going out of town soon’, just because a select few are going to jury duty does not mean that time will stand still and wait for their duty to be done. The last thing to cross most people’s mine, is that jury duty is a right, a civic duty, to allow a fellow man to speak to a member of his peers. However, just because most people dislike jury duty does not mean everyone does, some people may take great pride in deciding the fate of another person.

    Read More

  • Uncertainty In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men

    980 Words  | 2 Pages

    Even before the jury sits to take an initial vote, the third man has found something to complain about. Describing “the way these lawyers can talk, and talk and talk, even when the case is as obvious as this” one was. Then, without discussing any of the facts presented in court, three immediately voiced his opinion that the boy is guilty. It is like this with juror number three quite often, jumping to conclusions without any kind of proof. When the idea that the murder weapon, a unique switchblade knife, is not the only one of its kind, three expresses “[that] it’s not possible!” Juror eight, on the other hand, is a man who takes a much more patient approach to the task of dictating which path the defendant's life takes. The actions of juror three are antagonistic to juror eight as he tries people to take time and look at the evidence. During any discussion, juror number three sided with those who shared his opinion and was put off by anyone who sided with “this golden-voiced little preacher over here,” juror eight. His superior attitude was an influence on his ability to admit when the jury’s argument was weak. Even when a fellow juror had provided a reasonable doubt for evidence to implicate the young defendant, three was the last one to let the argument go. Ironically, the play ends with a 180 turn from where it began; with juror three

    Read More

  • Intolerance And Prejudice In The Play Twelve Angry Men

    1285 Words  | 3 Pages

    Despite knowing how angry the other men would be at him, the 8th juror stood up for the defendant and did what he could to make sure the boy had a fair trial. From the beginning, Juror eight was clearly confident in what he believed in and did not care about how foolish he looked. The confidence he showed brought the other jurors to rethink their vote. Juror nine was the first person to recognize the amount of courage it took for juror eight to stand up against the men. After being the first to change his vote nine explains “This gentleman chose to stand alone against us. That’s his right. It takes a great deal of courage to stand alone even if you believe in something very strongly. He left the verdict up to us. He gambled for support and I gave it to him. I want to hear more. The vote is ten to two.” The 9th juror agreed with the eight juror about wanting justice. By standing up for justice he gave nine the courage to stand up for the same reason. Juror eight continued to be consistent with what he believed in. Never did he

    Read More

  • Compare and Contrast Play and Movie Versions of 12 Angry Men

    1039 Words  | 3 Pages

    Not able to remember much about this particular part of the movie, I believe this introductory scene's purpose was to either enhance the realism of the setting by emphasizing the court building's efficient, business like manner or to provide a timeslot in which to roll the credits for producer, director, stars, etc. The settings aren't only built upon through the use of scenery and extras in the movie. Invisible and distant in the play, we see in the movie the judge, bailiff, those witnessing the trial and most importantly of all- the defendant. This is an important change because in the case, we are free to come up with our own unbiased conclusions as to the nature and identity of the defendant, whom we only know to be a 19 year boy from the slums. Seeing his haggard and worn face in the movie changes all of that, yet for better or worse, it engages the audience deeper into the trial as they surely will sympathize with him and can gain some insight into why, later, Juror 8 does so as well.

    Read More

  • Examples Of Injustice In 12 Angry Men

    200 Words  | 1 Pages

    I firmly believe that there is no such thing as justice. What might be justice for one person, could be injustice for the other. For instance, in the 1950’s film 12 Angry Men directed by Sidney Lumet, a 18 year old boy was accused of stabbing his father with a switch blade knife. 12 “angry” jurors had to decide the fate of a young boys life. Each man wrote down there votes, either guilty or non guilty.

    Read More

  • Civic Responsibility In Twelve Angry Men, By Reginald Rose

    531 Words  | 2 Pages

    Juror 6 seems to be part of one of the characters’ whose intentions exhibit otherwise. He proclaims vociferously, “It’s pretty obvious, I mean, I was convinced from the first day”. This sentiment provides compelling evidence as to what the Juror’s intentions and perspectives were, towards the alleged sixteen-year-old. In addition, an important factor that can be taken into consideration is the factor of civic responsibility, which he didn’t uphold properly. In fact, it was proved to have biased, prejudiced and pre-conceptualised

    Read More

  • Comparing and Contrasting Juror 3 and Juror 8 from Twelve Angry Men

    1056 Words  | 3 Pages

    These two jurors are almost the plain opposite of each other. Juror 3 appears to be a very intolerant man accustomed of forcing his wishes and views upon others. On the other hand, Juror 8 is an honest man who keeps an open mind for both evidence and reasonable doubt. Since these two people are indeed very different, they both have singular thoughts relating to the murder case. Juror 8 is a man who is loyal to justice. In the beginning of the play, he was the only one to vote ‘not guilty’ the first time the twelve men called a vote. Although his personality is reflected on being a quiet, thoughtful, gentle man, he is still a very persistent person who will fight for justice to be done. Juror 8 is a convincing man who presents his arguments well, but can also be seen as manipulative. An example would be when he kept provoking Juror 3 until he finally said “I’m going to kill you" to Juror 8. He did this because he wanted to prove that saying "I’ll kill you" doesn’t necessarily mean that Juror 3 was actually going to kill him. Juror 3 is a totally different character. He is a stubborn man who can be detected with a streak of sad...

    Read More

  • Analysis of the Jurors in 12 Angry Men

    617 Words  | 2 Pages

    Guilty or not guilty? This the key question during the murder trial of a young man accused of fatally stabbing his father. The play 12 Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, introduces to the audience twelve members of a jury made up of contrasting men from various backgrounds. One of the most critical elements of the play is how the personalities and experiences of these men influence their initial majority vote of guilty. Three of the most influential members include juror #3, juror #10, and juror #11. Their past experiences and personal bias determine their thoughts and opinions on the case. Therefore, how a person feels inside is reflected in his/her thoughts, opinions, and behavior.

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men Juror 8 A Hero

    909 Words  | 2 Pages

    In beginning when the jurors were taking their first vote, he stood against them, by himself, for his belief that the boy was not guilty based on the evidence that the jurors have been given. He even stood up against the others when it seemed that the other jurors had made up their minds about the boy. This is very different from what Juror three did at the end of the play because at the end of the play Juror three saw that he was the only one that still thought that the boy was guilty. After three saw this he backed down and went with everyone else. This makes Juror eight the hero because heroes need to stand up for what they believe in if they think that they are in the right. Also if eight would have not stood up for what he had believed in, then the boy would have gone to prison with evidence that didn’t prove he killed his father. The example of what three did at the end is used to show what someone who is not a hero would have done. Someone who is not a hero would not have stood up for what they believe in, they would have just gone with what everyone else was

    Read More

  • The Goonies

    4567 Words  | 10 Pages

    My analysis is on the film The Goonies. While I view the movie and determine the various norms, behaviors, roles and interaction between group members, as well as individuals the examination within the realm of film can present many of the same components. Thus, our group selected this movie to analyze based on its formation of a cohesive problem-solving group full of unforgettable characters. The Goonies portray many different theories and aspects of small group communication.

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men Persuasive Essay

    445 Words  | 1 Pages

    The problem that has been tormenting the eight juror is that no other jurors, other then the fifth juror agree with him. The eight juror claims that the boy is not guilty, but since everyone believes that he committed the murder, he has to convince them that he's right. Everyone is also accusing him for his opinion, which is making him frustrated.

    Read More

  • Justice vs Revenge

    1309 Words  | 3 Pages

    Nunez, Mark. "12 Angry Men." University of San Francisco. University of San Francisco, April/2000. Web. 11 Dec 2011. .

    Read More

  • Analysis of 12 Angry Men

    1246 Words  | 3 Pages

    In viewing 12 Angry Men, we see face to face exactly what man really is capable of being. We see different views, different opinions of men such as altruism, egoism, good and evil. It is no doubt that human beings possess either one or any of these characteristics, which make them unique. It is safe to say that our actions, beliefs, and choices separate us from animals and non-livings. The 20th century English philosopher, Martin Hollis, once said, “Free will – the ability to make decisions about how to act – is what distinguishes people from non-human animals and machines 1”. He went to describe human beings as “self conscious, rational, creative. We can fall in love, write sonnets or plan for tomorrow. We are capable of faith, hope and charity, and for that matter, of envy, hated and malice. We know truth from error, right from wrong 2.” Human nature by definition is “Characteristics or qualities that make human beings different from anything else”. With this said, the topic of human nature has been around for a very long time, it is a complex subject with no right or wrong answer. An American rabbi, Samuel Umen, gave examples of contradictions of human nature in his book, Images of Man. “He is compassionate, generous, loving and forgiving, but also cruel, vengeful, selfish and vindictive 3”. Existentialism by definition is, “The belief that existence comes before essence, that is, that who you are is only determined by you yourself, and not merely an accident of birth”. A French philosopher, Jean-Paul Sartre, is the most famous and influential 20th - century existentialist. He summed up human nature as “existence precedes essence”. In his book, Existentialism and Human Emotions, he explained what he meant by this. “It means that, first of all, man exists, turns up, appears on the scene, and, only afterwards, defines himself. If man, as the existentialist conceives him, is indefinable, it is because at first he is nothing. Only afterward will be something, and he himself will have made what he will be 4”. After watching 12 Angry Men, the prominent view on human nature that is best portrayed in the movie is that people are free to be whatever they want because as Sartre said, “people create themselves every moment of everyday according to the choices they make 5”.

    Read More

More about 12 Angry Men: Injustice Questions

Open Document