Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Now and then character analysis
Now and then character analysis
Now and then character analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Juror number 8 argues that the case should be further deliberated considering a young boys’ life is at stake. Some of the jurors believe that the constant abuse the boy received from his father caused him to kill him. At this point most of the jurors were getting irritated so juror number 8 requested another vote be taken, which we would not participate in. If the 11 jurors all voted guilty then juror number 8 would also change his vote too guilty, but if another juror votes not guilty the 12 men will stay and discuss the case further. Juror number 9 wanted to hear
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.
Because of this, the court's ability to reach a unanimous and just verdict is delayed. Additionally, Juror 3's stubbornness can be seen in his attitude towards the defendant's alibi which is shown when he exclaims, “You’re
His own son hasn’t seen him in years and he want to take out his anger on whoever he can, which just so happens to be the kid on trial. Juror Three’s feelings led him to be prejudice against the kid on trial. At the very end, he becomes visibly upset and give his final verdict, not
Then the mood shifts in Act 2, where Juror 9’s personality starts to unfold more. He shares key points in the evidence and is able to voice his opinions more powerfully. This generates a change in his vote to not guilty and he is the first out of eleven jurors to do so.. One of his key points is that the neighboring old man's testimony in court doesn’t add up with the murder. As he and a couple of the jurors including number eight uncover this lie from the old man, other jurors like number three and ten, disagree with their statements saying he wouldn’t lie.
This is when Juror Three realizes he has been holding a personal grudge and has put all of his frustration about the situation onto the case and even the other jurors. Finally, Juror Three votes not
Juror 3: He is an impulsive, humourless and extremely opinionated character whose own conflict with his own son caused him to take the case personally. Being a Controller (intuitor/judger temperament) with low emotional stability and high in competitiveness, he displayed his ‘bull’ tendency when other Jurors do not share the same opinions as him. This can be seen during the many times in the movie where he happens to have a conflict with Juror 8 over the difference in their view. This relationship of theirs is denoted by a zigzag line in the sociogram. His Type A personality clashes with majority of the Jurors as he uses
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.
He was to all the other jurors and full of doubt to the evidence of the boy. Juror three clearly understood all the evidence given but I doubt that he took the time to think about it in the boys shoes or if that’s not really what happened. He doubted the boy severely, he didn’t sit down and think about what could happen to the boy's
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
Juror 10 is a closed minded older man. He uses a lot of stereotypes to make his decisions on whether or not the accused is really guilty or innocent. Juror 10 yells, “You said it there. I don't want any part of them, believe me” (12 Angry Men). At this point in the play he was using where the accused lived and grew up to influence his choice, he then quickly denied the fact that he is like that with everyone when one
It is about whether the jury has a reasonable doubt about his guilt. When the first ballot is taken, 10 of his fellow jurors agree that defendant is guilty while there is only one Juror had different view that defendant is innocent. Juror No. 10 begins a racist rant. As he continues, one juror
He’s the kind of guy to always get what he wants. When he’s wrong, he takes it to a personal level. The third juror has absolutely no problem bullying the other jurors into what he wants them to vote. He begins to try to persuade the weakest of the jurors, the second juror. The third juror begins to become irritated when the other members want to review the evidence.
People act upon what they think. Within “12 Angry Men”, all of the jurors have an opinion but some voice their more than others. One juror in particular, Juror Ten, voices his opinion about the boy in question. Repeatedly throughout the play, Juror Ten makes many thoughtless and hurtful comments about a certain kind of people. It is clear that Juror Ten’s uncompromising belief that the accused is guilty is because of his dislike for the boy’s race.
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