Twelve Angry Men Analysis The jurors In the play, Twelve Angry Men, were left to connect their thoughts and come to a conclusion of not guilty or guilty. Jurors need to be able to make persuasive arguments when discussing with each other. Using persuasive techniques is important to jury deliberation and in the play, Twelve Angry Men pathos, visuals, and rhetorical devices are used to persuade the other jurors. Jurors used pathos multiple times to encourage them to connect to the boy being accused of murder. There was only one juror that voted not guilty, Juror Eight, but after talking through the Old Man’s testimony and another vote. The results were ten to two with Juror Eight and Juror Nine voting not guilty. Juror Nine is described as,”’... …show more content…
Therefore, the jurors can be convinced to rethink their vote with pathos to connect emotionally but also with visuals. Juror Eight uses visuals to help paint out the pictures for the others in the room. Reenacting certain parts of someone's testimony can help the jury find reasonable doubt in the case. In the Old Man’s testimony, he claims that it was fifteen seconds between the events. The jurors set up a demonstration of the Old Man’s apartment and timed how long it would take for him to walk his path to the door and back. After the demonstration was completed, Juror Eleven claims, “‘Thirty-nine seconds!”’ (41 Rose). The Old Man was twenty-four seconds off, given that there was more time between the events, proving that there is reasonable doubt within the Old Man’s testimony and the events themselves. The Old Man couldn’t have seen what he saw and moved that quickly in fifteen seconds. Nevertheless, visuals help with the jury's conclusion but rhetorical devices also play a part in persuading the jury. Many similarities can be drawn between the trial and peoples actions in everyday life, and these rhetorical devices are used to establish these