ipl-logo

12 Angry Men Research Paper

473 Words2 Pages

Have you ever assumed something and just went based off of that instead of getting more information about it? You shouldn't go based off of what someone says, at-least try to look sore some facts before actually just believing it. It's very common for so many people, everyone goes through it and has done it at-least once. Sometimes it is annoying having to look at a background of something to find the truth about something, but it has to be revealed if it hasn't already been. There's 12 angry men trying to discuss a case, and some of the men are just going based off of what they believe instead of what information they have gotten. It isn't fair to the boy for the 12 men to think he killed his father without trying to solve the case …show more content…

They are trying to find out if a boy has supposedly killed his father is true or not. Some of the men just want to go based off of what they are hearing and are not trying to find out more about the case. Some of the men vote to try to see if the boy is guilty or not but the votes are half and half, so what they try to do is look at the boys background, the father's background, and the people who told them had seen it all's backgrounds. They try to look at every detail to find out if the boy is guilty or not and they are trying to not go based of of what the people who supposedly seen it because they are trying to look at it from different perspectives. The twelve men spend half of their time arguing but they finally try to act out everything. starting with the boy killing his father, on how he kills him with the knife, and the old woman that said she seen it but wears glasses and uses two canes to walk on and the old guy that was across the hall who had said he seen it all, and the train passing by and being able to hear the boy yell. At the end, they realize that it was a good thing to act it out instead of believing what the people had said because they figured it out on their own and they all voted the boy not

Show More
Related
726 Words | 3 Pages

Many people, if asked what they would prefer, would prefer to read the book instead of watching the movie. It could be because the movie will always leave some parts from the story out. It seems like directors of the movie always leave out parts from the book, only incorporating the important parts from the story. Some also say that they prefer to leave the descriptions of things in the book up to their imagination. Also, when you are reading the book, you get to read the main characters point of view on things.

Read More
997 Words | 4 Pages

Some of the arguments and issues with the case that he seems to care most about are the knife Juror #8 bought that is similar to the murder weapon and how fast it took the old man to get to the door. In Act 1, Juror #4 begins to explain that the knife used is very unusual. That even the store-keeper that sold the knife had never seen a weapon like that before. Juror #8 then argues that someone could have possibly gotten a knife similar to the one the boy had and then “reaches into his pocket and swiftly withdraws a knife... they are exactly alike”(23).

Read More
502 Words | 3 Pages

In the play 12 Angry Men, a murder case is being reviewed by a jury. This jury must decide if a kid who killed his father is guilty or not. Two jurors that were on opposing sides for most of the play was Juror Eight and Juror Three. The reason they were on opposing sides was because Juror Three believed the kid was guilty, while Juror Eight believed there was not enough evidence to convict him. Most of the jurors wanted to settle on having reasonable doubt, so another jury could be called in.

Read More
1964 Words | 8 Pages

Moreover, when everyone decided that the boy is guilty, he suggested that they should talk about it first. Furthermore, he said that he didn 't

Read More
747 Words | 3 Pages

He fills in an X and hands the pencil to NO. 12.” (12 Angry Men). He thinks the only pieces of evidence are the witnesses because they said they saw the killing even though there was flaws within their testimony. After further investigation, he agrees the boy is not guilty. Then, juror number three persuades number twelve

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
844 Words | 4 Pages

This may cause the jury to be indecisive between what the actual case and what the media portrays it to be. The amount of media released for cases creates a negative impact within the courts and makes it difficult for a fair trial. When juries are uncertain about a case or a suspect, they result to social media platforms and news coverage that will provide them with more information and depth into the case. ‘’But if the case unfolds in the media, by the time a case gets to court, the supposedly impartial jury (or even the judge) may have already heard information and allegations (not admissible by court standards) that have caused them to seriously prejudice the parties’’. (Nedim, 2014).

Read More
550 Words | 3 Pages

One of the men in the room, eight, says “There were eleven votes for guilty. It's not so easy for me to raise my hand and send a boy off to die

Read More
1458 Words | 6 Pages

This 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

Read More
1783 Words | 8 Pages

Although, there is a rough start, they all came together for a good ending with their final verdict as the boy being

Read More
842 Words | 4 Pages

It is a natural human instinct to want to be acknowledge by your peers, yet it is also important to be a critical thinker. Irving Janis in 1972 created the term groupthink. He believed groupthink occurs inside a group of similar people that want to keep from being different, resulting in incoherent decision-making. The 1957 film "12 Angry Men," uses groupthink, which influenced the verdict vote in the case of a teenager accused of murdering his father. The purpose of this essay is to examine groupthink and to represent Dr. Irving Janis’ symptoms of groupthink in the film.

Read More
488 Words | 2 Pages

Twelve Angry Men “A person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.” In the play, Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose, a nineteen years old is on trial for the murder of his father. After many pieces of evidence were presented, the three that are weak include the one of a kind knife, the old men who heard the words “I’m going to kill you!” and the woman who is in question because of her glasses. Based on these, the boy is not guilty.

Read More
583 Words | 3 Pages

Juror 8 shows internal conflict when he asks the jurors who they think a killer is. “Tell me what the facial characteristics if a killer are.” When Juror 8 says “tell me” it shows that he is angry and no one at the moment can prove him wrong. Juror 8 has an internal conflict of the need of proving the boy

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
1404 Words | 6 Pages

Could they be wrong? “ – Both the statements listed above involve use of the fallacy of “Begging the question” 3) “How come you believe the woman’s story, she is one of them too, isn’t she?” – This fallacy is what we call as Hasty generalization. According to him, since the woman who gave the testimony against the boy lives in the same locality as the boy, her testimony can also be doubted upon. He tries to convince other jurors with this seemingly inappropriate

Read More

More about 12 Angry Men Research Paper

Related Topics

Open Document