ipl-logo

Death Penalty in 'Twelve Angry Men'

739 Words3 Pages

Story Line
12 men meet at a Jury Room after a trial to decide if a 16 year old man is guilty of killing his father if the man is found guilty the sentence is Death Penalty, this was supposed to be an easy decision, but turn around when one of the members of the Jury was not agree and bought in question the witnesses and what they saw or heard versus what they should.
The majority of the members were against Jury number 8, but when he was presenting more remarkable and questionable proves to the case one by one started changing their mind.
At the end all the members where agree that was not enough proves to convict this young man to death.
Overview of the Film
Themes:
Justice
12 men are responsible to decide if a young man is guilty of killing …show more content…

Other members of the jury just thought that the man is guilty for his condition and from where he is coming from, even one of them shows a lot of discrimination regards the conditions of this young man that even stated that if they sent the accused to the death penalty that will prevent future issues in the …show more content…

Family
The 3rd Juror mention how disrespectful was his kid, and how his kid even hit him once; some other members of the jury mention how this young boy was always getting hit by his father and they said that the situation was the motive of the murder. Juror number 3 was the last one in changing his vote not because he wasn’t sure, but he wants to punish this kid making a direct assimilation that this kid is like his and need to be punished.
Characters:
• 1st Juror: he acts as a foreman and he is responsible to maintain the order in the room and keep everyone else in track. This is not too hard for him because he is a football coach.
• 2nd Juror: this actor doesn’t participate too much in the play, and he is shyer than the rest of the group.
• 3rd Juror: he is the last one that changed the vote, he is a business owner and the relationship with his son is really bad. He wants to punish this young kid not for what he is accused, but because he sees his son reflected in this kid.
• 4th Juror: he just looks for facts and does how he changed his vote when they analyze how bad his vision without

Show More
Related

Juror Three In Twelve Angry Men

186 Words | 1 Pages

As 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.

Read More

Ethos Pathos In 12 Angry Men

997 Words | 4 Pages

In his play Twelve Angry Men, Reginald Rose brings us back in time to 1957, to a jury room of a New York Court of Law where one man, Juror #8, confronts the rest of the jury to look at a homicide case without prejudice, and ultimately convinces Juror #2, a very soft-spoken man who at first had little say in the deliberation. Throughout the play, many of the jurors give convincing arguments that make one think about whether the boy is “guilty” or “not guilty.” Ultimately, one is convinced by ethos, logos, and pathos. We can see ethos, logos, and pathos having an effect on Juror #2 as he begins as a humble man and changes into someone brave at the end. Although all three modes play a part in convincing Juror #2, pathos was the most influential

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

Peer Pressure In Reginald Rose's 12 Angry Men

1247 Words | 5 Pages

While all of the other men have changed their vote to a not guilty verdict, the third jurors remains with his original belief. Even in the very end of the play, he acts hostile against the others trying to change his mind, in saying “Do you think I’m an idiot or something?” (Rose 72). One juror that seems almost impervious to argumentative fallacies and peer pressure is Juror 8. Juror almost displays the ideal juror, and the rest tend to mimic the flaws of the system.

Read More

12 Angry Men Assessment: 12 Angry Men

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

Character Differences In 12 Angry Men

1133 Words | 5 Pages

He is often seen asking other jurors to elaborate on their opinion, not just tell them they are wrong. The cool blue, soft circle shows his willingness to listen, and not have a

Read More

12 Angry Men Rhetorical Analysis

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

Examples Of Social Injustice In 12 Angry Men

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

How Did The Conflict That Occur In England After 1534

153 Words | 1 Pages

London, England practiced mainly Anglican, Anglican is a kind of Protestantism created in England after 1534. Henry VIII created the church. So he could divorce from his first wife. The church became more of a Protestant church after Henry's death. Wittenberg, Germany was mainly Lutheran, the Lutheran church is the oldest protestant Christian tradition.

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

Juror 8 Character Analysis

1254 Words | 6 Pages

A group of juror comprising of 12 men from diverse backgrounds began their early deliberations with 11 of ‘guilty’ and 1 of ‘not guilty’ verdicts. Juror 8 portrayed himself as a charismatic and high self-confident architect. Initially, Juror 1 who played the foreman positioned himself as self-appointed leader of the team in which has led his authority to be challenged as his leadership style lacked in drive and weak. In the contrary, Juror 8 is seen as the emergent leader considering his openness to probing conversations while remaining calm. Implying this openness to the present, it has become crucial that a good decision relies on knowledge, experience, thorough analysis and most importantly critical thinking.

Read More

The Justice System In Twelve Angry Men

591 Words | 3 Pages

This makes Juror number three from the play was biased because he

Read More

Reasonable Doubt In Twelve Angry Men

1011 Words | 5 Pages

Reasonable doubt proves that critical thinking is important when someone’s life is in someone else’s hands. “Twelve Angry Men” by Reginald Rose, is a play about twelve jury members who must deliberate and decide the fate of a man who is accused of murdering his father. These twelve men must unanimously agree on whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty without reasonable doubt. Just like the jurors, the readers of this play have not witnessed the crime that took place before the trial started. Everyone, but the writer, is in the dark about who committed the crime.

Read More

12 Angry Men Murder Scene Analysis

851 Words | 4 Pages

Juror eight held his ground and convince the men to look over all of the evidence. Juror eight brought out the files, acted out different situations and the murder scene. The men went back and forth for hours fighting about whether or not the boy was guilt of killing his father Slowly one by one the jurors changed their mind from guilty to not guilty. All but juror three changed their mind, he was the last one standing so the vote was 11-1.

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

More about Death Penalty in 'Twelve Angry Men'

Related Topics

Open Document