ipl-logo

Juror 8 In 'Twelve Angry Men' By Reginald Rose

683 Words3 Pages

How It All Began As the jurors step into the room, all 12 minds are set on the idea that without a doubt, the man in question has killed his father; all except one. More follow suit as the original mastermind stands up to the majority, and that majority soon becomes a minority. All endings do start with a beginning though, and that beginning is Juror Eight, who steps up to the challenge of becoming a justice seeker, and soon, others follow. In “Twelve Angry Men”, a play formed by Reginald Rose, Juror Eight is our shining protagonist, looking only to create fairness in the court of law. But who is Juror Eight, who are the men that follow him, and what are their reasons for doing so? An in depth highlight of three jurors, eight, five, & nine, will reveal the …show more content…

Jurors Eight, Nine, and Five are just the same. Juror Eight began this entire mess with his claim that the boy could be innocent, not believing that it was so simple that they could just all vote guilty right off the bat. This triggered the first changed vote, which was set by Juror Nine. Juror Nine was influenced by Juror Eight’s courage, seeing as he valued it so much. Juror Five on the other hand voted because of his background and his defiance towards how it was slandered in the jury room. 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

Show More
Related

Loyalty And Jurors In Twelve Angry Men

311 Words | 2 Pages

Twelve Angry Men was about a group of jurors struggle to come with a verdict for a murder case. In the beginning, all but one tenacious juror believed that the eighteen year old boy was guilty of murdering his father. The main problem of the story was that the jurors verdict had to be unanimous. Through the process of trying to get each other to change positions, the jurors face many arguments and disagreements. The jurors personalities clash multiple times because each one has a different view on things and are adamant in their decisions.

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

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

12 Angry Men Juror 8

661 Words | 3 Pages

Twelve angry men essay Juror eight brang the eleven-one guilty vote to a twelve-nothing non-guilty vote with compelling evidence, relatable facts and physical evidence that denies the opposing points and wins the boy his life and freedom. Juror eight took the non-lazy approach to making his arguments by visiting the scene finding the lies and reviewing the case the night before. The switch knife was a relatable piece of evidence that compelled the hardcore, new york jurors to the non guilty vote. The train statement was a great display of intellectual fact supporting aswell, which had nearly no flaws. When juror eight argued his point with the switch knife it was amazingly intelectual and clever.

Read More

Not Guilty In Twelve Angry Men By Reginald Rose

576 Words | 3 Pages

The 8th juror stood up for the boy and believed he should at least deserve a chance. Through many hours of arguments and disputes, all jurors came to a decision. The defendant is not guilty. In the beginning of the book, eleven out of the twelve jurors voted guilty.

Read More

Juror Eight And Juror Three In John Steinbeck's 12 Angry Men

502 Words | 3 Pages

Juror Eight was the only man from the beginning of the play who stuck by his belief that the kid was innocent. He stood alone in front of the other jurors and defended himself from the other jurors, such as Juror Three and Juror Ten. Jurors Three and Ten were adamant that the kid was guilty and refused to listen to Juror Eight’s “nonsense”. Juror Eight’s evidence and speeches persuaded all the other jurors to change their vote from not guilty, except for Juror Three. The only reason Juror Three had it out for the kid was because he himself had some issues with kids respecting their parents, and specifically their fathers.

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

Twelve Angry Men, By Reginald Rose

333 Words | 2 Pages

One way that Juror 10 helped the other jurors reach a unanimous decision is when Juror 8 is talking about how the kid doesn’t have a good life, Juror 10 says, “‘I’ve lived among ‘em all my life. You can’t believe a word they say.’” This shows that Juror 10 is biased towards people in the slums, and thinks they can’t be trusted. The other jurors don’t like what he’s saying. Juror 9 thinks it is very dangerous to be saying that, and thinks he’s wrong.

Read More

Analytical Essay On 12 Angry Men

744 Words | 3 Pages

The Power of Three Perspectives One can be easily mislead or persuade in a direction they do not agree with. However this is not the case with Juror 8 (Mr. Davis) in the film 12 Angry Men. In this film, twelve jurors try to identify whether or not the convicted eighteen year-old boy is guilty of murdering his father with a switchblade knife. If the puerto-rican boy is found guilty, he will be sent to the electric chair and sentenced to death.

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

Character Differences In 12 Angry Men

1133 Words | 5 Pages

Although 3 does change his mind in the end, he is the last to change so he is the leader for the guilty side. In the end, the reader can look at figure 1. and take away the fact that juror 8 is the main character, and that jurors 3 and 8 causes the main conflict in the

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

Standing Up To The Majority In 12 Angry Men

1191 Words | 5 Pages

The play 12 Angry Men is about a jury of twelve men that are given the task of deciding the fate, guilty or not guilty, of a young boy accused of murdering his father. The theme of standing up against the majority is very prevalent in this story because of the decisions some of the jurors make throughout the play. Juror 8 makes the decision to vote not guilty, he is the one and only juror in this play that decides to vote not guilty for the boy in the beginning. The other eleven jurors decide to vote guilty because of the evidence that they have been presented with. The act of Juror 8 standing against the majority of the other jurors about the case, voting not guilty, allows the jurors to thoroughly dissect the case, understanding it fully and thoughtfully before making their decision of guilty or not guilty.

Read More

Minority Influence In 12 Angry Men

1458 Words | 6 Pages

Mobashshir Arshad Ansari DM 16230 The movie “12 Angry Men” is a court drama based movie. The entire film takes place within a small New York City jury room, on "the hottest day of the year," as 12 men debate the fate of a young defendant charged with murdering his father. Most courtroom movies feel it necessary to end with a clear-cut verdict. But "12 Angry Men" never states whether the defendant is innocent or guilty if innocent then who is guilty.

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

More about Juror 8 In 'Twelve Angry Men' By Reginald Rose

Open Document