ipl-logo

Civic Duty In 12 Angry Men

578 Words3 Pages

In the film, “Twelve Angry Men” they show the role of the jury in finding the verdict for the court trial. In the US Constitution under the sixth amendment, this helps establish the procedures and right in criminal prosecutions and also gives some protections to the criminal. It is important to have an impartial jury and to be well informed on the cases. In the film the jury is tasked with finding the verdict of a young teen charged with the murder of his father. They have heard and seen the evidence involved and now they must come up with a verdict. In the film only one jurors is willing to try to be well informed and impartial on the cases. The others have some prejudices on the cases and what to give the guilty verdict. This one juror takes his civic duty …show more content…

There can be a lot of uncertainties in the justice system and they should be looked at carefully. This one juror is trying to show this by his action, however unpopular they may be. This juror is also not just doing this to mess up the cases but rather just trying to find the truth of the matter. This process then begins to question the other jurors and their conclusions that they have on the case. Deliberation and the processes involved are important not only to the courtroom but to life. The theme of prejudices and race are slowly faded out by the end of the film with equality and impartiality. The role of prejudices and being partial could have stopped the system and ended with a guilty verdict as most of them had this. They are able to change and find a more impartial process through the use of deliberation and help find the truth. The one juror is able to walk them through the slow and hard process. Also the role of justice and judgement are involved with this and involved with how they go about their verdict. The justice system should be fair and impartial. This is a challenging thing to do and is a slow

Show More
Related

  • Jury System DBQ Essay

    515 Words  | 3 Pages

    Jurors should not know anything about a specific case and not follow public affairs and read the news (Doc F). When a person is selected to be part of a jury, they have to say an oath stating that they will not use their emotions to determine the verdict of a trial. If a juror is caught using their emotions, they will be fined for a crime called perjury. Since there are twelve people in a jury, there is a variation of opinions when the jury decides a verdict. But, a judge is more professional and knows how to only use the evidence provided and be less biased.

    Read More

  • Jury System Dbq Essay

    773 Words  | 4 Pages

    During the Boston Bombing trial, the court system retrieved three thousand citizens of Boston to be surveyed. It took those months to get the twelve adults they needed which is a really long time. In those three months where they were choosing a jury, they could have already completed the trial and the verdict would have been reached much quicker. Instead of waiting months for the jury to be selected, they could have rolled with one or two judges, three at max, to decide on the case. Juror selection is a long and complicated process that requires patience, money, and time.

    Read More

  • The Importance Of Jury Duty In Twelve Angry Men

    351 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Twelve Angry Men author, Reginald Rose, demonstrates the importance of not only serving on Jury Duty but a valuable life lesson for the jurors as well. Rose began the play with a description of twelve diverse men with twelve very unique personalities. Rose is trying to consult an illustration on why it’s important to see every piece of evidence by showing emotion through characters resolving them to argue and disagree. He is trying to show how even when you don't want to do something, put an extra 110% of your effort into it, the life of another, isn't something to joke around with. Jury duty is called upon and mandatory when you’re a U.S. citizen.

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men Persuasive Essay

    572 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Twelve Angry Men, Juror 1(Foreman) says, “Anyway this friend of my uncle’s was on a jury once, about ten years ago- a case just like this one..... They let him off. Reasonable doubt. And do y’know, about eight years later they found out that he’d actually done it, anyway.” By allowing different people onto the jury, they have the ability to give assumptions and information about other cases which can sway and harm the verdict.

    Read More

  • Twelve Angry Men And The Court System

    1057 Words  | 5 Pages

    This proves to be a serious problem because a juror could have a good valid point to bring up in court. An example of this is just like in the story. In the story, juror eight brings up many valid points with the other jurors that could have completely turned the tide and helped the accused victim, but was not allowed to bring up these points due to his inability to talk in the court session. Another problem that goes side by side with the first point is that because of their inability to speak in the court session jurors then have to

    Read More

  • Ethos, Pathos, Pathos And Logos In 12 Angry Men

    1964 Words  | 8 Pages

    What is worth our attention in this movie is how in the beginning they are trying to convince each other to vote guilty. 11 juror voted guilty and only one voted not guilty. Their judgments were based upon either their past personal experience which created their thoughts and behavior or upon facts. Juror 8 represents the conscience. He stood up for his inner feelings that the accused young boy is innocent.

    Read More

  • Group Roles: Following Group Process Observing

    777 Words  | 4 Pages

    1. From what you know about the members of the jury, what members demonstrated the following Group Roles - supporting, process observing, blocking, and withdrawing? Give specific examples as evidence of your opinion. (See page 46) In the beginning of this movie it's very clear that these men have made up their minds about this young man's guilt.

    Read More

  • Examples Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men

    915 Words  | 4 Pages

    People act upon what they think. Within “12 Angry Men”, all of the jurors have an opinion but some voice their more than others. One juror in particular, Juror Ten, voices his opinion about the boy in question. Repeatedly throughout the play, Juror Ten makes many thoughtless and hurtful comments about a certain kind of people. It is clear that Juror Ten’s uncompromising belief that the accused is guilty is because of his dislike for the boy’s race.

    Read More

  • Fallacies In 12 Angry Men

    1404 Words  | 6 Pages

    The script introduces the viewers to the typical behavior and the state of mind of these jurors, who surprisingly turn out to be the last to change their opinions from “guilty” to “not guilty”. Juror#3 the frustrated father whose personal conflicts and experiences influence his view of the accused’s crime is very desperate to make it clear that his mind is already made up before the deliberations even start. Similar

    Read More

  • Minority Influence In 12 Angry Men

    1458 Words  | 6 Pages

    It is about whether the jury has a reasonable doubt about his guilt. When the first ballot is taken, 10 of his fellow jurors agree that defendant is guilty while there is only one Juror had different view that defendant is innocent. Juror No. 10 begins a racist rant. As he continues, one juror

    Read More

  • Leadership In 12 Angry Men

    630 Words  | 3 Pages

    Juror #3 mixed his personal conflicts with his son running away from home to the young man accused of hurting his father. His assumption was that young men who don't get along with their fathers might go as far as to kill him. Which is a very informal practice in a small group setting. Another incident of a informal role is to not provide the evidence first hand how can a room full of jurors decide the fate of somebody when they don't have precise evidence to incriminate him. Other jurors based the fact that the accused lived in a slum and that slum residents are delinquents by nature.

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men Analysis

    814 Words  | 4 Pages

    With selfish attitudes like this, it was unlikely that Juror 10 would be interested in the truth behind the evidence and the case itself. Hence, his racial prejudice was important in determining his vote. He believes the boy is guilty, not because the facts point to it, but because of the boy’s ethnicity. It is clear that Rose has constructed Juror 10 as a means of identifying that prejudice,

    Read More

  • Role Of Group Dynamics In 12 Angry Men

    2268 Words  | 10 Pages

    Abstract 12 Angry Men is an American drama film produced in the year 1957. This film was adapted from the teleplay 12 Angry Men which was named by Reginald Rose, written and co-produced by Rose himself and directed by Sidney Lumet. This classic, mind gripping and penetrating black and white film tells the story of a diverse group of twelve jurors, all male, middle aged and of middle class status, who were entrusted with the power of determining the fate of an uneducated teenage Puerto Rican boy who was accused of murdering his father with a switchblade and was facing the possibility of the electric chair. The film also depicts a jury attempting to render a unanimous verdict in the murder trial. The process whereby the decision is reached illustrates a situation where a minority transforms the opinion of a majority by exerting persuasive tactics and demonstrating effective leadership.

    Read More

  • Examples Of Social Injustice In 12 Angry Men

    803 Words  | 4 Pages

    This process continues throughout the course of the movie, and each juror’s biases is slowly revealed. Earlier through the movie, it is already justifiable to label juror 10 as a bigoted racist as he reveals strong racist tendencies against the defendant, stating his only reason for voting guilty is the boy’s ethnicity and background. . Another interesting aspect of this 1957 film is the “reverse prejudice” portrayed by juror

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men Moral

    1485 Words  | 6 Pages

    It is everybody's right to have a fair trial. Thirdly, any case has different perspectives, and it is essential to view all the possible perspectives before any final decision is made. Compared to nowadays courtroom drama such as law and order or the good wife, 12 Angry Men appears to give a deeper meaning. While these two series talk about the life of lawyers and how they convey their ideas, deal with complicated cases, and the philosophy of right and wrong, 12 Angry Men presents the case from the jury point of view. It presents how normal people would look at such a case, how would they deal with a complicated murder, and most importantly how would they handle such a

    Read More

More about Civic Duty In 12 Angry Men

Open Document