Stormy, rain-filled nights, ear-splitting passing elephant trains, ominous nighttime noises, individuals frightfully screaming, and birds swooping into the sky are the descriptions that create a terrifying night. Murder: the premeditated killing of one human being by another. The act of crime that will determine the fate of the killer. In the movie 12 Angry Men, viewers examine the dynamics at play in a United States jury room in the 1950’s. Twelve diverse citizens are pulled from their daily lives, dressed in button-up shirts and dapper ties, and are summoned to decide the fate of a young boy, either proving him to be ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty’, over the murder of his father. Although the jurors make assumptions based on the facts given in the …show more content…
He was the one man keeping the young boy alive since the preliminary vote was tallied at eleven to one. Juror Eight made every point of his persuasion easy to accept and acknowledge. He went about the discussion with the intent to be as logical as possible, appealing to ethics, so the rest of the jury couldn't easily object to his ideas, even if this meant addressing the boy’s appearance and home life, “Look, this boy’s been kicked around all his life. You know, living in a slum, his mother dead since he was nine. That’s not a very good head start. He’s a tough, angry kid. You know why slum kids get that way? Because we knock ‘em on the head once a day, every day. I think maybe we owe him a few words. That’s all.” Juror Number Eight appeals to the facts of the young boy’s looks and life at home with attempts to get the other jurors to visualize what the boy’s life actually is. This is an example of ethos because Juror Eight is pointing out that the defendant grew up as a poor, abused child, and therefore it is only right that the jurors discuss the case seriously. However, not everyone agreed with the ethical appeals coming from Juror
“Come on. You’re like everybody else. You think too much, you get mixed up.” This quote written by Reginald Rose from 12 Angry Men perfectly sums up why the jurors needed to have doubt. Doubt was the most important factor in coming up with the conclusion that changed many of the jurors minds. The jurors needed to have doubt for the conclusion to come out as not guilty because the witnesses could have been lying, the jurors contradicted their arguments many times, and reasonable doubt was present.
In a crowded jury room in downtown New York, opinions collide as discussion about the innocence of a young boy is decided. The dark and foreboding storm clouds that hang over the heads of the jurors are beginning to lift as time progresses and new facts are presented. One juror is not happy about this stay of execution and is holding fast his opinion of guilty. Juror three, the president of his business, refuses to alter his vote or opinion in any way. Still haunted by his own son, juror three verbally assaults the group with a forceful tone and a taciturn attitude. One of twelve, Reginald Rose created them all from the same pen and ink, and they could all be no more different.
Twelve angry men is a play about twelve jurors who have to decide if the defendant is guilty of murdering his father, the play consist of many themes including prejudice, intolerance, justice , and courage. The play begins with a judge explaining to the jurors their job and how in order for the boy to be sent to death the vote must be unanimous. The jurors are then locked into a small room on a hot summer day. At first, it seems as though the verdict is obvious until juror eight decides to vote not guilty. From that moment on, the characters begin to show their true colors. Some of the characters appear to be biased and prejudice while others just want justice and the truth. Twelve Angry Men Despite many of the negative qualities we see
This event in his personal life was dramatically influencing his decision in the jury room, but he was able to overcome his personal prejudice from the efforts of juror 8 “it’s hard to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this, and no matter where you run into it, prejudice obscures the truth” This quote shows juror 8’s understanding towards juror 3 in particular, and in turn allows him to overcome his personal prejudice. The young boy’s social status and childhood upbringing also influenced many of the juror’s perspective on him. The men came with pre conceived ideas about boy, just because he grew up in a slum, and allowed this reason and possibly their own personal reason to obscure their view on the
Juror 8: According to juror 8 the defendants poor up bring could be a reason for his criminal record. He says _You know--------- living in a slum, his mother dead since he was nine. He spent a hear an a half in orphanage while his father served in jail term for forgery, That’s not a very good start” (Pg.13)
The play, ‘Twelve Angry men’, written by Reginald Rose, explores the thrilling story of how twelve different orientated jurors express their perceptions towards a delinquent crime, allegedly committed by a black, sixteen-year-old. Throughout the duration of the play, we witness how the juror’s background ordeals and presumptuous assumptions influence the way they conceptualise the whole testimony itself.
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...
Twelve Angry Men, is a play written by Reginald Rose. The play is about the process of individuals and a court case, which is determining the fate of a teenager. It presents the themes of justice, independence and ignorance. Rose emphasises these three themes through the characters and the dialogue. Justice is the principle of moral rightness or equity. This is shown through juror number eight who isn’t sure whether or not the boy is actually innocent or guilty, but he persists to ask questions and convinces the other jurors to think about the facts first. Independence is shown through both juror number three and ten. They both believe that the defendant is guilty until they both realise that they can not relate there past experiences with the court case. Ignorance is shown throughout all the jurors during the play, it is also brought out through the setting of the play.
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.
The Factors Influencing the Way Each of the Members of the Jury Perceived the Murder in Twelve Angry Men
Twelve Angry Men is a play written by Reginald Rose concerning the jury of a murder trial. It is centred around a debate of wether the accused is guilty or not guilty of murdering his father. Initially, 11 out of the 12 jurors deem him as guilty, however the 8th votes
Dictating a man's future would seem enough be a difficult task for anyone, for it is whether this man ends up with a lifetime in prison or he is given the privilege to walk the streets. Deciphering facts from fictitious tales, and putting everything up for questioning. Such an experience was only granted to men in the 1950’s. A time when race and gender were gradually beginning to not be definitive of an individual's social class. Although, it may seem like an incredibly undesirable task, sitting in hot New York courthouse with eleven other men is needed for justice to rightfully be served. Yet, the justice system is inevitably susceptible to a flaw, as personal prejudices slip through the initial screening and become apparent in the jury room. In Reginald Rose’s Twelve Angry Men the jury systems imperfections are addressed. He demonstrates the atmosphere of the jury room by introducing twelve characters with unique personalities. A particular character I believe to stand out from the rest would be juror ten. Upon first glance, he comes across as a bigot, but as the play continues he exhibits he is also impatient, arrogant, cantankerous and several other traits.
12 Angry men is about a group of men who are appointed as jury’s. They are put in a room until they could come up with a conclusion, on whether the boy who was convicted of murder is guilty or not.
Juror 8 stands up for what he believes in and wants to start discussing while the other jurors start getting annoyed by his choice. Juror 7 is also in a rush because he has tickets to a baseball game he planned to attend after the verdict was made.
Guilty or not guilty is the key question found stuck in the head of any juror on a murder case. It seems like such a simple question, but the twelve jurors for a murder case of a boy who may have killed his father takes the question to a whole new level. The behaviors of these twelve men are quite unique when looking at them psychologically. They can be determined by a numerous number of psychological phenomena. Some specific phenomena that can be shown using incidences throughout the movie of 12 Angry Men are conformity, stereotyping, memory, personality, and sensation and perception.