Who Was The Architect In 12 Angry Men

913 Words2 Pages

The movie, 12 Angry Men, is a movie about a twelve-man jury and their way of deciding whether or not a boy who was accused of killing his father was guilty or not guilty. The juror I focused on in the movie was the eighth man on the jury and also was an architect. The architect was the only man to vote “not guilty” on the boy in beginning of the movie. The architect was an intelligent and caring man and his first vote of “not guilty” proves this. The other eleven men automatically just assumed the boy was guilty of killing his father but the architect thought long and hard about the fate of the boy and decided that he couldn’t live with himself if he decided the boy was guilty and the boy was actually innocent. The other jurors were aggravated that the architect chose differently because most of them were just ready to leave and the only way they could do that was if all the men agreed on the same verdict. The architect just didn’t think that the investigation took much thought and that it was conducted fairly. “What if the two eye witnesses were wrong” was his main point for why he chose “not guilty”. The architect’s initial …show more content…

A few of the men changed their vote and the vote went from eleven thinking guilty to now be that nine men were voting guilty. The argument from the architect showed that he was a very intelligent, caring man who believed what he thought was right and that he wouldn’t change his mind just because some of the men were growing angry at him for thinking differently. The architect even went as far as doing his own investigating on the case to check out the crime scene and playing out the facts as they were told in court. Eventually, as time goes on the architect starts getting other jurors to be on the same page as him and they too started to think harder on the

Open Document