ipl-logo

Juror's Guilt In 12 Angry Men

560 Words3 Pages

12 Angry men is about 12 jury members and a foreman who are trying to determine if a boy is innocent or guilty. The case is about a boy who allegedly killed his father. All of the Jurors thought the boy with guilty but one, which was number 8. He wanted to make sure that everyone knew all the evidence so, they would be sure before they send a boy to jail. Number 3 was very strongly convinced throughout the whole trial that the boy was guilty. Juror number 8 and number 3 didn’t have much in common. But the only things they had in common were negative things, they never could agree on the evidence that was being brought to them to help the case.
“NO. 8: (to NO. 3). You're alone.
NO. 3: I don't care whether I'm alone or not! I have a right. …show more content…

He didn't have any true evidence on why he was innocent but his gut feeling. His first priority was to make all the other twelve jurors think the same as him. “It’s not that easy for me to raise my hand and send a boy to jail” (12 Angry Men). He didn't want to send a innocent boy to rot in jail for something he didn't do. He went through all the facts and let everyone talk and the counter act on what everyone else said. Juror number 3 is a very angry man who wants for the boy in question to be guilty. He wants nothing more than for him to go to jail. Juror number 3 doesn't stick to the facts he made the case more personal then it should have been. He stuck to one piece of evidence and then went on that piece until everyone agreed with him. He brought up a few times how his childhood was bad and brought a picture to show everyone and guilt trip them. The only reason he wanted the boy to be guilty was because of his own problems. “Listen. What's the matter with you? You're the guy. You made all the arguments. You can't turn now. A guilty man's gonna be walking the streets. A murderer. Hes got to die. Stay with me.” (Rose 30). He wants the boy to be sent away because of his father when he was a

Show More
Related
726 Words | 3 Pages

Many people, if asked what they would prefer, would prefer to read the book instead of watching the movie. It could be because the movie will always leave some parts from the story out. It seems like directors of the movie always leave out parts from the book, only incorporating the important parts from the story. Some also say that they prefer to leave the descriptions of things in the book up to their imagination. Also, when you are reading the book, you get to read the main characters point of view on things.

Read More
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
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
1133 Words | 5 Pages

While both end up voting the same way, their approaches throughout the majority of the film are vastly different. To start, the third juror is much more factual, stating in the film, “Okay let’s get the facts… and he ran to the door of his apartment and the boy!”(12 Angry Men) This immediately shows the viewer that Juror 3 will base the majority of his argument in fact. In contrast, Juror 8 feels that communicating with the other jurors and piecing together their views is a better way to solve the case. This is shown when Juror 8 says, “There were eleven votes guilty.

Read More
549 Words | 3 Pages

What if one day, twenty years from now you were chosen to discuss the fate of an eighteen year old boy. What would you do? Would you take your job and do it responsibly, or would you do it like some of the Jurors in 12 Angry Men and blow it off so you can finish early and leave. Even though there was a lot of controversy in that jury room, I noticed that Jurors 3,7, and 9 used their personalities, beliefs, and views of their responsibilities to bring the boy on trial to justice. This very excitable juror is the last to change his vote, and while his stubbornness could be seen as being based more on emotions than facts, he starts off with his little notebook with facts of the case and tries to insist that he has no personal feelings on the matter.

Read More
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
842 Words | 4 Pages

Juror 3 was intimidating the other jurors, trying to convince them to stick with the guilty verdict. Juror 2 was guilty of self-censorship agreeing with the rest of the group to influence his decisions. The whole group began with the illusion of unanimity. According to Janis illusion of unanimity is, “the majority view and judgments are assumed to be unanimous.” (Psysr.org,

Read More
981 Words | 4 Pages

Especially in today's time people are racist, angry, and just do not want to take time out of their everyday lives for jury duty. This trial was completely backwards; instead of going from innocent until proven guilty, it went from guilty to innocent. This movie makes one wonder how often juries really are this way, instead of innocent until proven guilty. Mr. Davis had an extremely hard time convincing all the jurors that there was a reasonable doubt. Davis had to say that he did not know if the defendant was innocent, Davis just knew that he had a reasonable doubt.

Read More
630 Words | 3 Pages

Juror #3 mixed his personal conflicts with his son running away from home to the young man accused of hurting his father. His assumption was that young men who don't get along with their fathers might go as far as to kill him. Which is a very informal practice in a small group setting. Another incident of a informal role is to not provide the evidence first hand how can a room full of jurors decide the fate of somebody when they don't have precise evidence to incriminate him. Other jurors based the fact that the accused lived in a slum and that slum residents are delinquents by nature.

Read More
591 Words | 3 Pages

Therefore, he tried to make the trial go faster by voting with the side with the most votes. My family in the real world also had to go through inconvenience of the jury duty. My cousin had her first prom and my Aunt got called for jury duty. She couldn’t help her daughter do her hair, makeup, and get pictures. My moms friend also had a conflict with the jury duty.

Read More
665 Words | 3 Pages

He was bitter and didn’t value any human life except his own. He thought the boy was guilty because the color of his skin. Juror number ten said “Most of them”

Read More
583 Words | 3 Pages

When juror three says “he hit me”,this is important because it shows juror thinks that kids who don’t listen to their parents are either from a slum neighborhood or are slum kids. He also compares his son to the boy without realizing it and judges the boy without even knowing him formally. This shows his internal conflict of anger with his son. Juror 5 also has past experiences that affect his decision making. “I used to play in a backyard filled with garbage.

Read More
1011 Words | 5 Pages

This is an important element when deciding who the best and worst jurors were. There were no facts as to who was right or wrong because we didn’t see the crime in question. All

Read More
915 Words | 4 Pages

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.

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 Guilt In 12 Angry Men

Related Topics

Open Document