Jurors 'Core Values In The MGM Film Twelve Angry Men'
When was the last time you had to convince someone to see things your way? I myself can remember in high school trying to convince my mom to let me spend the night out at my friend’s house to go to work the next morning. My job was in the same area that my friend lived in at the time. With the help of my sister to back me up, I was able to convince my mom letting me spend the night out for work. In the 1957 MGM film Twelve Angry Men, Mr. Davis relies on his core values of priorities, words, and personality to a quit the young man charged with murdering his father. However, I would argue that Mr. Davis self-confident core values can be over convincing and take away the clarity of the jurors’ vote. First convincing way Mr. Davis, juror #8 stood …show more content…
Davis used is sense of words in which he say, “There were eleven votes for guilty. It’s not so easy for me to send a boy off to die without talking about it first. He goes on to analyze the case, pointing out the choppy evidence that was presented to them. After discussing the case, Mr. Davis decides to call for a secret ballot vote, stating “Without casting my vote and if all votes come back guilty, I’ll cast my vote for guilty as well.” Which turned out that what was once a unanimous vote of 11-1 favoring guilty, is now at 10-2 still favoring guilty. The change of vote come from the old man juror #9. That gave Mr. Davis, juror #8 the fuel to continue to express his opinion toward the case showing us his …show more content…
Davis personality towards defending the kid grow stronger, he went above and beyond to produce evidence to help with his claim. Mr. Davis stated, “I got this last night in a little junk shop around the corner from the boy’s house. It cost two dollars” which was a replica of the murder weapon used. That action along got the other jurors upset, saying it was illegal for Mr. Davis to have done that. If that was not enough Mr. Davis calls out juror #3 “You want to see this boy die because you personally want it-not because of the facts.” That made the angry juror #3 upset, he tried attacking Mr. Davis, yelling to him he was going to kill him. Mr. Davis said to him, looking directly in his eyes “you really don’t want to kill me, do you?” Asking that question then showed the other jurors in the room, how people can say things out of stress. Such as how the witness claim to see the incident happening in the middle of the night, with a train passing by, and without her glasses
12 Angry Men Rhetorical Analysis
681 Words | 3 PagesThe jurors continually exhibit the opposite of the aforementioned emotions and beliefs. After the protest by the 8th Juror about the oddly quick guilty verdict voted on by the jurors, the 7th Juror dismissed him continually, “It’s just that we’re talking about somebody’s life here. I mean, we can’t decide in five minutes. Suppose we’re wrong? 7TH
Film Review: Jury Duty In The Twelve Angry Men
222 Words | 1 PagesThe Twelve Anger Men in my opinion is an extraordinary movie that depicts a diverse group of twelve men who are charged with jury duty. The twelve men differed in age, race, socio-economic status, and life experiences. The movie begins at the close of a murder trial conducted in a New York City courtroom, as a judge specifically gives the jury men instructions as they prepare to deliberate on the murder trial of a Puerto Rican youth accused of killing his father. Before the men deliberated the judge overly reminded them that a guilty verdict that means an automatic death sentence for the defendant, must be obtained without any reasonable doubt. Subsequently, the movie continues as the group of anger jury-men come face to face with their differences
Juror Three In Twelve Angry Men
186 Words | 1 PagesAs the play went on, Juror Eight started proving how the boy was innocent. In the end Juror Eight changed all the other juror’s minds, except for Juror Three’s. Juror Three ended up changing his vote, not because they changed his mind but because he gave into peer pressure. He still had his prejudice influenced decision, he only gave in because he didn't want it to be a hung jury. Another example, from the same play, is Juror Eight.
Examples Of Innocence In 12 Angry Men
333 Words | 2 Pages“A person is innocent until proved guilty in a court of law” In the play Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose, an 18-year-old is on trial for the murder of his father. After many pieces of evidence, the three that are in doubt are the old man hearing “I’m going to kill you!” as well as the weapon of choice and how it was replicated, and finally the woman’s testimony. In my opinion, the boy could have been proven guilty, based on these the boy is not guilty.
Examples Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men
915 Words | 4 PagesPeople 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.
Fallacies In 12 Angry Men
1404 Words | 6 PagesThe 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
Mr Davis In 12 Angry Men
691 Words | 3 PagesTwelve Angry Men dates back to 1957 when twelve jurors are sitting in front of a murder case. The murder case regards a son being accused of stabbing his father to death. As the jury heads into their room to choose their verdict, the vote begins eleven to one. Only one man in that entire room could find the defendant not guilty. That one man, Mr. Davis, decided to be the difference.
Standing Up To The Majority In 12 Angry Men
1191 Words | 5 PagesThe play 12 Angry Men is about a jury of twelve men that are given the task of deciding the fate, guilty or not guilty, of a young boy accused of murdering his father. The theme of standing up against the majority is very prevalent in this story because of the decisions some of the jurors make throughout the play. Juror 8 makes the decision to vote not guilty, he is the one and only juror in this play that decides to vote not guilty for the boy in the beginning. The other eleven jurors decide to vote guilty because of the evidence that they have been presented with. The act of Juror 8 standing against the majority of the other jurors about the case, voting not guilty, allows the jurors to thoroughly dissect the case, understanding it fully and thoughtfully before making their decision of guilty or not guilty.
Minority Influence In 12 Angry Men
1458 Words | 6 PagesThis movie is the best example of minority influence where in the earlier stage only one juror no. 8 says defendant is not guilty but in the end of the movie we see that he is able to influence all the jurors in a very logical manner which I am going to point out later so that all the jurors lastly says the defendant is not guilty. Minority influence is more likely to occur if the point of view of the minority is consistent, flexible, and appealing to the majority. The juror no. 8 doesn’t know defendant is guilty or not guilty but he has only doubt in his mind which he trying to clear during the entire film and with which he also able to clear the views of other
Movie Analysis: Twelve Angry Men
1206 Words | 5 PagesThe people’s sympathy and concern for this young man’s life was the main goal in this murder trial. When he convinces the other jurors to talk it over for another hour, Juror eight also exemplifies the foot-in-the-door approach. In additional to the above tactics, he
Reasonable Doubt In Twelve Angry Men
1011 Words | 5 PagesThis is an important element when deciding who the best and worst jurors were. There were no facts as to who was right or wrong because we didn’t see the crime in question. All
The Justice System In Twelve Angry Men
591 Words | 3 PagesTherefore, he tried to make the trial go faster by voting with the side with the most votes. My family in the real world also had to go through inconvenience of the jury duty. My cousin had her first prom and my Aunt got called for jury duty. She couldn’t help her daughter do her hair, makeup, and get pictures. My moms friend also had a conflict with the jury duty.
Why Is Juror 8 Important In 12 Angry Men
1033 Words | 5 PagesJuror 8 whose name is Davis was the only juror to vote not guilty in the first vote by the jury. Over time and heated discussion, he is able to sway the jury and ultimately prove that the kid is not guilty. Davis was able to sway the jury due to his passion to stand up for what he believed in and his ability to relate with others while demonstrating Aristotle's means of persuasion. Juror number eight was not going to let a decision be
12 Angry Men Case Study
858 Words | 4 PagesIn a New York City, an 18-year-old male from a slum is on a trial claiming that he is responsible for his father death by stabbing him After both sides has finished their closing argument in the trial, the judge asks the jury to decide whether the boy is guilty or not The judge informs the jury decided the boy is guilty, he will face a death sentence as a result of this trial The jurors went into the private room to discuss about this case. At the first vote, all jurors vote guilty apart from Juror 8 (Henry Fonda), he was the only one who voted “Note Guilty” Juror 8 told other jurors that they should discuss about this case before they put a boy into a death sentence
Social Psychology In The Movie Twelve Angry Men
721 Words | 3 PagesThis theory is practicable inside of the juror’s decisional processes of the “Twelve Angry Men.” Conformity is described from the beginnings of the film. When the jurors cast their initial vote, doubt is clear in many of the jurors whom vote guilty. This inhibition might be commented as weak belief shaked by the guilty majority’s influence. Additionally, though the movie is not provide any references about the timelines of decision this is a relevant factor presumably affecting the “Twelve Angry Men,” and should be considered as a potential element in creating social
More about Jurors 'Core Values In The MGM Film Twelve Angry Men'
12 Angry Men Rhetorical Analysis
681 Words | 3 PagesFilm Review: Jury Duty In The Twelve Angry Men
222 Words | 1 PagesJuror Three In Twelve Angry Men
186 Words | 1 PagesExamples Of Innocence In 12 Angry Men
333 Words | 2 PagesExamples Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men
915 Words | 4 PagesFallacies In 12 Angry Men
1404 Words | 6 PagesMr Davis In 12 Angry Men
691 Words | 3 PagesStanding Up To The Majority In 12 Angry Men
1191 Words | 5 PagesMinority Influence In 12 Angry Men
1458 Words | 6 PagesMovie Analysis: Twelve Angry Men
1206 Words | 5 PagesReasonable Doubt In Twelve Angry Men
1011 Words | 5 PagesThe Justice System In Twelve Angry Men
591 Words | 3 PagesWhy Is Juror 8 Important In 12 Angry Men
1033 Words | 5 Pages12 Angry Men Case Study
858 Words | 4 PagesSocial Psychology In The Movie Twelve Angry Men
721 Words | 3 Pages