ipl-logo

12 Angry Men Legal System Flaws

686 Words3 Pages

Have your ever thought about the flaws in our US Legal System shown in Twelve Angry Men? In our US Legal System, we have major flaws that we have found to realize, but never fixed. These flaws show how the US Legal System treats the citizens. During the play, we see the judge on the first page mention, "I urge you to deliberate honestly and thoughtfully". This was not done during the play, which this'll show how the jury system can be like. The play Twelve Angry Men show how our US Legal System has major flaws in the system.In the US Legal System, the jury system's main problem is being swayed by personal experience and emotions. Based on KerterFlim.com, jurors tend to be more emotional in the jury room. They normally base their votes onto …show more content…

In the jury room, most people can mishear and mistake what the judge has told them, like the proof given in the courtroom. There's some moments where they can even misunderstand what the judge's instructions are for the jurors. This can be shown with the Foreman in Twelve Angry Men. The Foreman in Twelve Angry Men can be shown straight away going into the voting process. This goes against what the judge first said in the script, to deliberate the proof and evidence and come up with a verdict. Another example in Twelve Angry Men, juror 12 couldn't make his own decisions throughout the discussion he would swing his vote to what the majority is voting for. This can show how some jurors are when it comes to the voting process in the jury room, where they ignore or mishear what the judge has told them to do, and how some jurors become unpredictable when making decisions. "The US Legal System is supposed to go by their own opinions and rules, we can follow our own ways". This can't be right when it comes to legal actions done to someone or put onto someone. When in the jury room and courtroom, we have to follow laws and listen to the judge. Jurors have to make a verdict and share their different opinions of the evidence and proof. Also, being open-minded to new information is necessary throughout the jury room because you can't be stuck onto one piece of evidence through the discussion. In Twelve Angry Men, juror 3 was stuck onto his vote for guilty due to his own experience from his son. He was also stuck on the evidence of how the old man and the woman from across the street supposedly saw the defendant kill his father. This shows how the jurors can be unpredictable and also lead onto emotions and past experience. This gives evidence of how Twelve Angry Men show how our US Legal System has major flaws in the system and how it's flawed. In conclusion, the US Legal System is

Show More
Related
683 Words | 3 Pages

No matter the motives of any juror, each can be traced back to Juror Eight, and the fact that he was brave enough to stand against the crowd. In the end, every juror eventually reached the verdict of not guilty, but there was still a very long process to get there, and many people that produced the answers for the others. Juror Eight is the only reason anyone in this play made a single sound, and he may have eventually been brought down if Juror Nine hadn’t changed his vote to support him. They worked as a team, with Juror Five soon joining in, Juror Eight had an incredible impact on everyone in that room, and he is the reason a boy who was most likely innocent was set

Read More
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
361 Words | 2 Pages

In, Twelve Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, there is a group of twelve jurors that are deliberating about a homicide case in New York. There are two jurors, Juror 3 and Juror 11, who have very different backgrounds and they disagree on a lot of things. Juror 11 is a German immigrant who views America as a new life of happiness while Juror 3 is an entrepreneur who is very proud of himself for having his own business. Throughout Act 1, the two jurors show how different they view America. For example, Juror 11 chooses to change his stance on the case to “Not Guilty” and when he does people start yelling at him.

Read More
829 Words | 4 Pages

Flaws Throughout The Judicial System Although the movie, “12 Angry Men” was made in the 50’s it is still relevant in the real world today. The movie provides an accurate portrayal of what happens in juries even to this day. This is shown through the skewed view of cases by juries. Juries are influenced by persuasion, personal bias, and prejudice.

Read More
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
432 Words | 2 Pages

In the court system, jurors are tasked with the duty to conduct a fair verdict based on the testimony given and additional evidence shown. Some may forget this responsibility and use their prejudices that affect the juror's decision on the defendant's future. As a result, the accused may be falsely convicted and lose the majority of their life. The play 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose shows three perfect examples of prejudices during jury duty such as colorism, classism, and ageism.

Read More
755 Words | 4 Pages

Though juror 3 has been adamant on the guilt of the young boy it is safe to say that this case meant more to him because the relationship with his son is similar to the relationship between the boy and the father. Since his personal vendetta causes him to forcefully accuse the boy of murder it leaves the jury 11-1 in favor of not guilty. Since carefully reviewing the movie it becomes very prevalent that there has not been enough substantial evidence to convict the boy of murder. Furthermore, with the usage of group think all of the men, accept juror 3 are able to put their pride aside and vote what they truly believe the verdict should be, which is not guilty. Though, one of the more pragmatic points in the film happens after juror 3 becomes infuriated after realizing that all of the men are voting not guilty.

Read More
1186 Words | 5 Pages

Twelve Angry Men is in many ways a love letter to the American legal justice system. We find here eleven men, swayed to conclusions by prejudices, past experience, and short-sightedness, challenged by one man who holds himself and his peers to a higher standard of justice, demanding that this marginalized member of society be given his due process. We see the jurors struggle between the two, seemingly conflicting, purposes of a jury, to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent. It proves, however, that the logic of the American trial-by-jury system does work.

Read More
734 Words | 3 Pages

The jurors in Twelve Angry Men also had to deal with this problem. Juror number 3 had a son who have not talked to in years because he was so tough on him when he was younger. This juror had no trouble believing that the boy killed his father because he thinks his son could have killed him. Juror number 11 was an immigrant who believed in the American Justice system with all his heart. He wanted to make sure that the boy had a fair trial because he believed that was the American way, his experiences in his own country were very unfair to people of different races, religions and

Read More
391 Words | 2 Pages

Certain jurors can be easily swayed. A good example of this is juror 2 promptly adopting the opinions of the other jurors without much reason. “Oh. Well… I just think he’s guilty. I thought it was obvious.

Read More
803 Words | 4 Pages

In 12 Angry Men, the movie begins in a courtroom where the case is being discussed by the judge, who seems fairly uninterested. The jurors are then instructed to enter the jury room to begin their deliberations. They take a vote and all but juror 8 vote guilty. The jurors react violently to the dissenting vote but ultimately decide to go around the table in hope of convincing the 8th juror.

Read More
591 Words | 3 Pages

The justice system that relies on twelve individuals reaching a life-or-death decision has many complications and dangers. The play Twelve Angry Men, by Reiginald Rose, illustrates the dangers of a justice system that relies on twelve people reaching a life-or-death decision because people are biased, they think of a jury system as an inconvenience, and many people aren’t as intelligent as others. The first reason why Reiginald illustrates dangers is because people can be biased or they can stereotype the defendant. The Jurors in Twelve Angry Men relate to this because a few of them were biased and several of them stereotyped the defendant for being from the slums. The defendant in this play was a 19 year old kid from the slums.

Read More
814 Words | 4 Pages

‘Twelve Angry Men’ written by Reginald Rose, is based on the story of a jury who have to come together to determine the fate of a young boy accused to have murdered his own father. Initially, eleven of the jurors vote not guilty with one of the juror being uncertain of the evidence put before them. As the men argue over the different pieces of evidence, the insanity begins to make sense and the decision becomes clearer as they vote several other times. Rose creates drama and tension in the jury room, clearly exploring through the many issues of prejudice, integrity and compassion, in gaining true justice towards the accused victim. These aspects have been revealed through three character who are Juror 10, Juror 8 and Juror 3.

Read More
271 Words | 2 Pages

Reginald Rose, the author of Twelve Angry Men, uses characters and their actions to show how the Judicial branch of the government isn’t always fair. The Judicial branch itself may be set up to be fair, but the people in charge of a case may not always put effort into it. The fifth amendment states that a person is innocent until proven guilty, they also do not have to say anything in court, this is set up so the law would have to find him/her guilty. With all this taken in, the jurors decide if the defendant is guilty or not, however if some of the jurors were rushing or biased the “fair” system wouldn’t matter. In the script; eleven of the twelve jurors voted guilty without giving much thought.

Read More
721 Words | 3 Pages

The movie “Twelve Angry Men” illustrates lots of social psychology theories. This stretched and attractive film, characterize a group of jurors who have to decide the innocence or guiltiness of an accused murder. They are simply deliberating the destiny of a Puerto Rican teenaged boy accused of murdering his father. Initially, as the film begins, except the juror Davis (Henry Fonda), all other jurors vote guilty. Progressively, the jurors begin trying to compromise on a point that everybody agree because the decision of the jury has to be unanimous.

Read More

More about 12 Angry Men Legal System Flaws

Related Topics

Open Document