about a child that is just about to be sentence to death penalty because he was suspicious of a premeditated murder. At the trial, the judge tell the jury that they have to find a verdict whether the boy is guilty or not of murdering his father. The judge was very specific when he said that the decision must be unanimous. When they get in the jury room to deliberate, eleven men stood in favor of condemn the boy to death but only one men refuse that sentence because he had many reasonable doubt to
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
· The decision has to be unanimous (hung jury was something nobody liked) · No racial prejudices were tolerated (everybody turned their backs to juror 10 when he started saying that “he knew people of these kind very well”) Processes: The group initially started with a process of arriving at a decision by voting and there was a groupthink causing everyone (apart from juror 8) to vote guilty. Then a secret ballot was carried out and it was decided that the jury would debate for at least an hour
saw in the end juror eight convinced the other eleven that the young boy was innocent, due to the fact that the “facts” were all a little fuzzy. The main goal was to have group of jurors all agree on either innocent or guilty and it can not be a hung jury. Some jurors really wanted to just vote and be completed with the task, while others like to investigate the young boy’s case a little deeper than what occurred in the courtroom.
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 are 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 decision and that the court would not entertain any acts of mercy for the boy if found guilty. Even before the deliberation
the line. However when a life is on the line, meaning that if the verdict is guilty, the person is automatically sentenced to death, you would hope a jury would be sure that a person is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, before sending a person to death. While watching the movie, 12 Angry Men, what seemed to be an open-and-shut guilty verdict for the jury, instead took a viewer through numerous ethical dilemmas, specifically dealing with prejudice, capital punishment, integrity, anger and hostility resulting
active in the deliberations. J2 appeared to have a strong personality as well, but soon made their mind up about the situation. J1 and J7 as will be discussed later on appear to be the most similar and often support and defend each other throughout the jury deliberation. J12 was active merely because she had to out of self-defense. J12 was the only juror that did not agree with the majority’s conclusions about Ducic and constantly had to defend herself and provide rebuttals with little support from the
The movie ‘12 angry me’ is not only humorous but it is also informative. It is a candid portrayal of various socio-psychological perspectives, used in during the study of human social behavior. Filmed as a story of a 12-members jury, under the directions of a judge, to determine an anonymous verdict in a murder case, the film delivers very convincing illustrations of cognitive dissonance, groupthink, and schemas. As the jury’s deliberation session commences, the jurors have the privilege of familiarizing
Bang! “All rise!” the clerk shouted. All twelve of them shuffled through the door, creating a muffled sound that broke the eerie silence of the courtroom located at 1127 Tower Lane. They solemnly walked down the hallway to the jury room. Unlike previous breaks in the trial where they laughed and conversed about their families and jobs, they were silent except for the occasional cough or sneeze. All of the jurors sensed the magnitude of the situation and felt the hallway stretching in length, a never-ending
In a deliberation, it is essential to be motivated by something to deliberate. There are certain characteristics that define deliberation as outlined in Gastil’s criteria, but an underlying question is why do people choose to take part on a deliberation? What makes us want to follow criteria stated by Gastil? In our recent class deliberations, it seems that in order to be motivated to deliberate a topic, we must have true personal stakes in the topic at hand. Being college students, we are living
Belief Perseverance The concept of belief perseverance (Myers, 82) can be found in the film, “12 Angry Men”. Throughout the film, the jury members discuss the verdict of a young, Mexican boy. It is essential to note that all twelve men serving on the jury are Caucasian. Somewhat because of the boy’s ethnicity, many of the jurors are initially in support of submitting a guilty verdict. This is made clear in the film when Juror #10 verbalizes what he ‘thinks’ is the opinion of the group; “Now, look
1. The jury consists people from different background. For example, in this jury, they have coach (juror#1), broker (#4), marketing person (#6) architect (#8) and watchmaker (#11); they have senior person (#9 & #10) and middle-aged person, they have serious person (most of them) and casual person (#7). Generally speaking I think the diversity do help the functioning as a team, because some people can see something the other cannot see. For example, one jury often see people fight with knives when
persuade the other jurors. Key aspects of the preparation stage, as defined by Budjac Corvette and utilized by juror 8, include preparation occurring prior to the negotiation meeting, research, and determining negotiation tactic and style. Throughout the jury deliberation, juror 8 disclosed information
twelve jurors who must come to a conviction on a murder case. Before the jurors leave to come to a verdict, the judge reminds them that their decision must be unanimous or a hung jury will be the result. The judge also tells them that if anyone has any “reasonable doubt,” he should vote “not guilty.” When they congregate, the jury votes almost immediately. Every juror votes “guilty” except for Juror 8, Henry Fonda. The film shows
trial of an 18 year old guy, who is accused of stabbing his own father to death, the judge appoints a 12 – man jury to discuss and deliberate on the
Twelve Angry Men. A play that describes the scene of a New York jury room, where twelve men have to decide between life and death for a inner-city teen, charged with killing his father. These jurors have to sift through the facts and the fiction to uncover the truth about the case and some truths about themselves. Reginald Rose outlines through the actions of juror number three, that no matter the consequences,
is known as; “change-promoting interpersonal processes based on group members selectively encouraging conformity and discouraging or even punishing nonconformity” (Forsyth, 2010) At the end of deliberations and discussing each topic of the case the jury unanimously voted not guilty. Thus, occurring conversion, “change that occurs when group members personally accept the influencer’s position; also, the movement of all members of a group to a single, mutually shared position, as when individuals who
decision reached by twelve jurors in a New York jury room. Twelve Angry Men displays the effects that one person can have on a group, it teaches the value of being part of a jury, and it explores how stereotypes and prejudices can have an effect on someone’s decision or beliefs. Juror Eight stood up for what he believed in against eleven other jurors, and eventually influenced them all to reach the verdict of not-guilty. At the end of the case, when the jury is about to come to a final decision, Juror
Different personalities have different effects on situations. Sometimes, you have to dig deeper into someone’s personalities to understand their places. In the film Twelve Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, twelve jurors come together and their different personalities create the whole story. The nature of each character had a different effect on the story. There are ways to simplify personalities by symbolizing them. In Diagram #1, Juror #12 is distant, Juror #8 is in the center, and Juror #3 is inside
seemingly open-and-shut murder trial case” (Driks, p,1). The jury are the people who are in a group that is thinking about the situation in court. All together they must decide together. Groupthink isn’t a good way because trying to decide as a group can be difficult. One or two might think one way and others may think totally different.