ipl-logo

Juror's 'Accused Of Crimes In Twelve Angry Men'

522 Words3 Pages

Twelve Angry Men

In our world there are so many people that get accused of crimes they did not commit. People have been accused of murder but they did not do it so they were sentenced to the death penalty. Eye witness testimonies could be fair or not fair depending on who you are asking.

Juror 3 States his point and sticks to it. When the Jurors decided to have the first vote he voted guilty and so did everybody else except Juror 8. The third Juror likes to stick to the facts and wants the boy to pay for what he did. Thinks everybody should have a fair trial. Juror 3 is a very formal man he said “ I used to call my father sir. That’s right sir! You ever hear a boy call his father that anymore” (Rose 17). The 8th Juror pulls out the same switchblade that the boy killed his father with. The 3rd Juror thinks he did not prove anything he said, “ Maybe there are ten knives like that” (Rose 23). He likes people to get to their point so he could understand what they are trying to say. He has been on many Juries and he is amazed how the lawyers can just talk and talk even when the case is so obvious as this one. The third Juror runs a messenger service “ The Beck and Call Company” (Rose 9). He is very rude because he is interrupting many of the jurors. …show more content…

He is a very formal man and likes to state is point. He likes to state the facts and just go off them not opinion. He likes to pick arguments because he likes to refute what the other person is saying. The 3rd juror does not like things to be repeated. Believes that you do not have to use any more information the woman that saw the killing is enough. The 3rd Juror said “I’m the competitive type. OK. Now here’s what I think. I think we’re a hung jury. Let's take it inside to the Judge” (Rose 67). The 3rd Juror originally said he does not want a hung jury but now he does, so he likes to change his

Show More
Related
683 Words | 3 Pages

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

Read More
183 Words | 1 Pages

He is now responding to what Juror Eight was shouting when he said “Perhaps you’d like to pull the switch” (42) . “For this kid? You bet I’d like to pull the switch.” This evidence is obviously telling us that Juror Three doesn’t

Read More
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
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
502 Words | 3 Pages

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

Read More
980 Words | 4 Pages

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

Read More
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
1223 Words | 5 Pages

The second juror who contradicted himself was juror number three. He was explaining to juror number eight that the defendant did not say the phrase “I’ll kill you” for no reason if he did not mean it (Rose 336). Shortly after this happened he spoke up to juror eight after two of the other jurors had him held back and hollered “Let me go! I’ll kill him. I’ll kill him!”

Read More
507 Words | 3 Pages

Juror #3’s son affected how he saw the facts of the case due to their relationship. Juror #’s son left his father and he sees it as his son's fault. “... When he was fifteen he hit me in the face. … I haven't seen in three years.

Read More
471 Words | 2 Pages

Juror #3 is another member of the jury who holds preconceived notions that prevent him from seeing the truth. He is convinced that the defendant is guilty and refuses to consider any evidence that suggests otherwise. When one of the other jurors suggests that the defendant might be innocent, Juror #3 responds with anger, accusing him of being biased in favor of "those people. " He cannot separate his own prejudices from the facts of the case, and as a result, he is unable to reach a fair

Read More
1133 Words | 5 Pages

As for Juror 3, he prefers loud, yelling, and calling people out and telling them they are wrong. This is why Juror 3 is represented with a lightning bolt. On the outside, he is obviously quick striking, hot, and loud. He can obviously be seen in the film yelling and attacking every character. On the other hand, Juror 8 is more tranquil, and cool, and will let anyone speak.

Read More
536 Words | 3 Pages

Juror 3 uses his personal beliefs to affect the emotions of the other

Read More
994 Words | 4 Pages

Early on he drops small and subtle remarks that indicates he’s bias. These alone don’t amount to much, but as the film progresses and as he becomes more emotional, his remarks begin to escalate. Until the end of the film when he outs himself for what he truly is. This elicits disgust from the other jurors, most notably from juror number 4 who also firmly votes guilty. Juror number 4 is the one who is able to remain the most level-headed and emotionless throughout the trial.

Read More
1011 Words | 5 Pages

He took his job as being the Foreman seriously by breaking up arguments and by making sure that everyone had a turn to speak. Despite having one of the hardest jobs in the jury, he remained civil and calm throughout the play. In the play “Twelve Angry Men” an argument between the jurors happens, the Physical Education Teacher stops it by saying, “All right. Let’s stop the arguing. Who’s got something constructive to say?”

Read More
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 Juror's 'Accused Of Crimes In Twelve Angry Men'

Related Topics

Open Document