Twelve Angry Men

663 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Effectiveness of the jury system

Twelve Angry Men

The jury in a trial is selected to examine certain facts and determine truth based only upon the evidence presented to them in court. It is assumed that the jurors will judge fairly and without any personal bias. In spite of this assumption people will be people and in some cases, logic and emotion will collide. An excellent example that shows precisely what I’m talking about is in the movie Twelve Angry Men. Twelve men who initially are strangers to each other have the fate of a young boy resting in the palm of their hands. In the beginning everyone is convinced he is guilty except one who has one reasonable doubt in his mind. The single man on his own was able to convince each of them by using logic to examine the testimony of each witness. After a few hours of reasoning the jurors were eventually won over allowing the facts to overcome their personal issues. During the arguments in the jury room the issues of race, age, social class, personal experience and stereo types are discussed a number of times. I presume it is because those are the personal issues that people have and sometimes that is what they base their judgment on. When you are in a jury you have the responsibility of setting all of that aside. Through the reasoning of the not-guilty voters the guilty voters are slowly realizing that despite their passed and personal reasons they have to take into consideration the more important actual events that occurred. Part of the problem the jurors are...

Show More
Related

  • Year Round Schooling: Should It Be Implemented?

    921 Words  | 2 Pages

    First, the pros of year round schooling can include; effects on absence and burnout rates, effects on budget, more frequent breaks, and also a big effect on academic achievement. The way that year round schooling works to reduce burnout and also reduce absences is that by having more frequent breaks; students are less likely to want to skip class. This is definitely noticeable after spring break where most schools don’t have any days off until the end of the year that is usually more than 2 months straight. In other words the “April, May, June stretch”. Year round schooling will also help students with their academics as well because with the way the schedule is set up, students do not ha...

    Read More

  • Examples Of Perseverance In 12 Angry Men

    1964 Words  | 4 Pages

    There are quite a few specific factors that affect whether the minority can influence the majority’s opinion. For example, when Juror #9 becomes an ally of support for Juror #8 in his defection from the majority consensus. Although Juror #8 may have started with only one ally, gradually he gained support from other jury members. Another important factor in the power of minority influence (Myers, 298) is the consistency of the viewpoint. Juror #8 never ‘flip-flops’, proponents of the minority position must stand firm against the pressure to conform. Even when Juror #8 is taunted by his fellow jurors after voting not-guilty in the initial vote he stands firm on his position and resists the pressure to conform. Furthermore, high self-confidence and self-assurance improves the position of the minority. Juror #8 presented firm and forceful arguments without being overbearing. He justifies his not-guilty vote by saying, “I just think we owe him a few words, that's all.” In the film, there is also a point in the discussion where Juror #6 defends those who voted not-guilty from the bullying, shouting, and name-calling from the other jurors. Throughout the film, Juror #3 is a bully, a specific example of insulting nature it seen in the film when another not-guilty ballot is received and he attacks Juror #5. He shouts, “Brother, you really are somethin'. You sit here vote guilty like the rest of us, then some golden-voiced preacher starts tearing your poor heart out about some underprivileged kid, just couldn't help becoming a murderer, and you change your vote. Well, if that isn't the most sickening - *why don't you drop a quarter in his collection box?” his criticisms of the other jurors does not sway people to his side. In reality, when a minority gathers strength people feel freer to think outside the box without the fear

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Men In 12 Angry Men

    904 Words  | 2 Pages

    We are all different. We are all at least biased on one topic. Some people just look at the surface, while others dig deeper into the facts that were given. Reginald Rose demonstrated these points beautifully in 12 Angry Men. All of the Jurors bring a special part of their personality to the jury room, which is the beauty of having a jury. All of the jurors are different in their own unique way,

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay On 12 Angry Men

    531 Words  | 2 Pages

    In America, every individual has the right to a fair trial, but how fair is the trial? When an individual is on trial, his or her life is on the line, which is decided by twelve strangers. However, who is to say that these individuals take their role seriously and are going to think critically about the case? Unfortunately, there is no way to monitor the true intentions of these individuals and what they feel or believe. In the movie, Twelve Angry Men, out of the twelve jurors’ only one was willing to make a stance against the others, even though the evidence seemed plausible against the defendant. Nevertheless, the justice system is crucial; however, it is needs be reformed.

    Read More

  • Biography Of Belle Boyd

    644 Words  | 2 Pages

    There are many documented occasions of her spying and delivering secrets. It is said that one day wh...

    Read More

  • A Member of the Jury in To Kill a Mockingbird

    657 Words  | 2 Pages

    The courthouse was crowded, all seats were taken and many were standing in the back. It was silent, no one spoke, not even a baby cried out. There was the Judge sitting in the front of the room, the defendant, the solicitor, and the jury. I was a member of the jury that day. Everyone knew the truth, the defendant was innocent, and the evidence that was established was supportive and clear. The jury’s decision however, was not based on evidence, but on race. A jury is supposed to put their beliefs aside and make a decision based on the information given during the trial. Jury members must do their duty and do what is right. I tried to do what was right, but all the other members of the jury were blind. They chose to convict because of skin color than actual evidence from the case. I wanted to avoid this disease, but it is easily spread from one person to another. It made me angry that an innocent man was convicted for something he did not even do. He was convicted because of his skin color and nothing else. When the judge asked us to leave the courtroom to make a decision, we stayed o...

    Read More

  • The Green Mile

    1075 Words  | 3 Pages

    Frank Darabont (writer-director-producer) in 1999, returned to the director’s chair for the first time in five years. Darabont, who not only directed Shawshank Redemption, but adapted it from a Stephen King story, followed the exact same path with The Green Mile. The film was released by Warner Bros. Pictures, and Produced by Castle Rock Entertainment, Darkwoods Productions, and Warner Bros. David Valdes is the producer, David Tattersall, B.S.C. is the director of photography, Terence Marsh is the production designer, and Richard Francis-Bruce is the film editor.

    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

  • The Criminal Trial Process

    1108 Words  | 3 Pages

    A jury is a panel of citizens, selected randomly from the electoral role, whose job it is to determine guilt or innocence based on the evidence presented. The Jury Act 1977 (NSW) stipulates the purpose of juries and some of the legal aspects, such as verdicts and the right of the defence and prosecution to challenge jurors. The jury system is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society as members of the community ultimately decide whether the person is guilty or innocent. The creation of the Jury Amendment Act 2006 (NSW) enabled the criminal trial process to better represent the standards of society as it allowed majority verdicts of 11-1 or 10-2, which also allowed the courts to be more resource efficient. Majority verdicts still ensure that a just outcome is reached as they are only used if there is a hung jury and there has been considerable deliberation. However, the role of the media is often criticized in relation to ensuring that the jurors remain unbiased as highlighted in the media article “Independent Juries” (SMH, 2001), and the wide reporting of R v Gittany 2013 supports the arguments raised in the media article. Hence, the jury system is moderately effective in reflecting the moral and ethical standards of society, as it resource efficient and achieves just outcomes, but the influence of the media reduces the effectiveness.

    Read More

  • Importance Of Jury Selection

    2734 Words  | 6 Pages

    Lieberman in Scientific Jury Selection states, “...scientific jury selection originated in criminal trials in which academic researchers provided assistance to defense counsel because the researchers were concerned about the government having disproportionate degree of power and control over the outcome of cases.” As stated before, a jury does not have to think about the laws or the influence of the judge and lawyers, they must simply agree on what they believe happened. Some juries depend on facts or evidence, while others decide on if they believe the story others decide on their moral stances. This all comes back into why psychology is so important in the process of jury selection. When a juror decides the fate of an individual they don’t necessarily just use their brain, they use their heart, or their beliefs. What someone believes in can only be interpreted through psychology, the scientific study of the human mind and its functions, especially those affecting behavior in a given context. Trying to predict the outcome of someone's decisions is very difficult, that's why we have so many specialists, and consultants that are used in trials to determine the best possible pathway for a criminal

    Read More

  • 12 Years a Slave

    1194 Words  | 3 Pages

    Solomon Northup was a black man who was born a free man at a time when slavery was still legal in America. He was born in Minerva, New York, in the year 1808 (Northup 19). Northup’s father, Mintus, was originally a slave of the Northup family in Rhode Island. He was freed when the family relocated to New York. When he was growing up as a young adult, Northup helped his father with farming chores and became a raftsman for a short while on the waterways of New York. As an adult, Northup married Anne Hampton, who was of mixed heritage on Christmas day of 1829. Together, they had three children. Over the years Northup became a famous fiddle player, and this gave him recognition in his town.

    Read More

  • The Green Mile

    480 Words  | 1 Pages

    the dark, and he didnt want to die in the dark. So the guard took

    Read More

  • Use of Persuasive Argument in 12 Angry Men

    1024 Words  | 3 Pages

    The movie “12 Angry Men” examines the dynamics at play in a United States jury room in the 1950’s. It revolves around the opinions and mindsets of twelve diverse characters that are tasked with pronouncing the guilt or innocence of a young man accused of patricide. The extraordinary element is that their finding will determine his life or death. This play was made into a movie in 1957, produced by Henry Fonda who played the lead role, Juror #8, and Reginald Rose who wrote the original screenplay. This essay will explore some of the critical thinking elements found within the context of this movie, and will show that rational reason and logic when used effectively can overcome the mostly ineffective rush to judgment that can be prevalent in a population. The juror that seemed interesting is Juror #8, who was played by Henry Fonda. Juror #8, or Davis, is an architect, the first dissenter and protagonist in the film. He was the first one to declare that the young man was innocent and he managed to convince the other jurors to see his point of view. Durkheim states that when we respond to deviance, it brings people together (Macionis, 2013, p. 159). We affirm the moral ties that bind us together, which was seen in the movie. At first, almost all of the jurors were so bent on convicting the young man based on their feelings, but they then started to analyze the facts and they came together to make their final decision.

    Read More

  • Violent Video Games and Increased Aggression

    1900 Words  | 4 Pages

    One article points out that video games have a big impact on children’s lives and that many of the games played are violent. Researchers have found that “nearly all children spend time playing video games” and studies have found that “8th graders spent an average of 17 hours per week playing video games” (Tamborini 336). Moreover, 68% of the most popular video games contain violence (Tamborini 336). So it is clear that many children have access to violent video games and they have a big impact on their lives simply because of the amount of time spent playing them.

    Read More

  • The 12 Angry Men Film

    1377 Words  | 3 Pages

    The film 12 Angry Men consisted of twelve members of the jury who tried to solve a murder trial case. Trapped in a room, all men put their heads together by communicating and listening to each other. Each juror voted unanimously and in order for them to make a decision every juror had to agree to the same thing. However, out of all the jurors (Henry Fonda) the architect had a different perspective. Just when all eleven jurors had agreed that the boy was guilty the architect stood up and said the boy was not guilty. The case was about a lady who had given her testimony in court swearing she saw the little boy kill his own father. One boy's fate is on one man’s hand. As the architect tried to prove his point towards the others, the old juror

    Read More

More about Twelve Angry Men

Open Document