ipl-logo

Guilty In '12 Angry Men'

471 Words2 Pages

12 Angry Men by #11

Someone has been killed, and this is no ordinary killing, a man was killed by his own son himself. 12 angry men fight this subject in court whether to prove the innocence of the boy. all All 11 jurors voted guilty except for one juror, he voted the the the boy not guilty. He thought that there was a possibility that the boy could have not stabbed his father but he is not 100% clear. The one juror made tremendous arguments on the boy being not guilty and even persuaded some of the other jurors to vote not guilty.

My opinion on the boy is that i think he is guilty because i think that he stabbed his father. Even though the one juror had a lot of points to why he wasn't was not guilty, I still think he killed his father with the knife that was found in his father’s chest. Even though he was still proven innocent, i still think he is guilty. When the jury men were in the jury room they were arguing about how the boy was guilty or not guilty. There was one very strong point in the room that was made about how the dad was killed. …show more content…

They made a statement that no one wears glasses to bed. That was the statement that made all the jurors go not guilty except for juror 3. Juror 3 did not vote not guilty because he didn't did not like the boy because he killed his father and he didn't did not want to think about his son killing him. 10th Juror: “Not guilty do whatever you want”, Juror 3: “you're the worst you son of a… I think he's guilty.” The reason why i I used this quote is to show how his attitude changed because of everyone changing their

Show More
Related

Twelve Angry Men: Comparing The Book And Film

726 Words | 3 Pages

When asked why he voted not guilty, juror eight stated “Look, this boy has been kicked around all his life. You know---living in a slum, his mother dead since he was nine. He spent a year in and a half in an orphanage while his father served a jail term for forgery. That’s not a very good head start. He’s had a pretty terrible sixteen years.

Read More

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

Juror #2 finds it “interesting that he’d find a knife exactly like the one the boy bought”(24). Afterwards, the 8th Juror suggests that the old man, one of the witnesses, lied because of the point Juror #3 tried to make. Juror #3 says, that the old man “[ran ] to his door and [saw ] the kid tearing down the stairs fifteen seconds after the killing”(42). Juror #8 then suggests that the old man could not have done that because of his stroke.

Read More

What Are The Similarities Between Juror 8 And To Kill A Mockingbird

1072 Words | 5 Pages

A court is only as sound as its jury, and a jury is only as sound as the men who make it up. I am confident that you gentlemen will review without passion the evidence you have heard, come to a decision, and restore this defendant to his family. In the name of God, do your duty." Juror 8 is very outspoken because he is the only one in the beginning that think the boy is not guilty. This leads him to stand up against all of the other jurors so that he can clearly get his point across.

Read More

Ethos, Pathos, Pathos And Logos In 12 Angry Men

1964 Words | 8 Pages

What if juror 8 did not have the courage to freely state his opinion? The innocent boy would be dead for doing absolutely nothing.

Read More

Analysis Of Stereotypes In 12 Angry Men

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

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

The Justice System In Twelve Angry Men

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

Evidence In 12 Angry Men

488 Words | 2 Pages

One piece of evidence that proves the boy’s innocence is the uncommon kind of knife. The testimony said that it was one of a kind knife, while juror number eight brought the exact same one in a local pawn shop proving that the knife wasn’t that rare. In addition to the not uncommon knife, we also have

Read More

12 Angry Men Internal Conflict Essay

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

12 Angry Men Analysis

814 Words | 4 Pages

Juror Ten announces his intentions very early in the play. He speaks loudly and forcefully from the beginning, clearly showing his racism and prejudice towards the boy. Juror 10 quickly votes guilty and asserts that the defendant cannot be believed because “they’re born liars”. Additionally, he claims that the “kids who crawl outa those places are real trash.”

Read More

How Does The Juror Use Sense Perceptions In 12 Angry Men

1183 Words | 5 Pages

The man’s a dangerous killer. You could see it." He hasn’t proved anything by saying this he just believes the young boy is guilty by thinking that everything that he heard in the courtroom was true. As well as believing that the woman’s eye witness testimony, which was that she saw the boy stab his father across the street. As juror ten states that “she swore she saw him do it” while there was a passing train.

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

Social Psychology In The Movie Twelve Angry Men

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

12 Angry Men Case Study

858 Words | 4 Pages

The boy should deserve a careful discussion from jurors before face the result of the trial and he emphases that there were only two people who saw the whole process of the murder stabbing the boy’s dad Juror 8 questioned the weapon which claim to kill father, which is a normal switchblade that even juror 8 owns one himself Juror 8 told other jurors to revote, and if this time 11 jurors still think that the boy is guilty, then he will go with them and say that the boy is guilty too One person voted “Not Guilty” at the second

Read More

More about Guilty In '12 Angry Men'

Related Topics

Open Document