ipl-logo

Juror's Guilt In 'Twelve Angry Men'

965 Words4 Pages

Many people claim that they could easily make the decision of guilty or not guilty, but is this really the case? The jurors in the play Twelve Angry Men are tasked with deciding the life of a boy accused of killing his father. This proves to be a daunting task for them as every juror except Juror 8 initially believes that the boy is not guilty. When asked to explain his reasoning for his verdict, he gives his reasons such as producing an exact replica of the knife and the woman across the el-tracks not wearing her glasses while spotting the murder take place. These two pieces of evidence prove to be the most crucial part of why the boy is innocent. This replica knife that was brought in by Juror 8 plays a major role in proving that the defendant …show more content…

Why would someone go to sleep with their glasses on? Juror 8 goes into this point by stating, “I think it’s logical to say that she was not wearing her glasses in bed, and I don’t think she’d put them on to glance out the window. . . . She testified that the murder took place the instant she looked out. She couldn’t have had time to put her glasses on then” (Rose 1.3.61-62). With this argument against the woman’s testimony, there is enough reasonable doubt that what she saw actually happened to rule out this being a major piece of evidence against the boy. The ruling out of these major pieces of evidence makes an argument for the boy’s guilt extremely difficult, but some would use the point of the old man and how he saw the boy go down the hallway after murdering his father to try and make an argument. The jurors prove that this could have happened by simulating the time of the murder and how fast the old man could have got to the door. Juror 12 states, “So now both time sequences check--the one you did and the one we did; what with running downstairs and everything, it does pretty much check out on time” (Rose …show more content…

One of the inconsistencies mentioned was the dim lights in the hallway, making it difficult to identify a running figure. Juror 11 touches on this, “... this old man looked down the dark hallway of a tenement and recognized a running figure” (Rose 1.3.53). It can be inferred that with this being an old man that needs help sitting down into a chair, he might not have the greatest eyesight and merely assumed that it was the boy running down the hallway. In summary, the story of Twelve Angry Men goes deep into the complexity of what makes someone innocent or guilty, which can change based on extreme critical thinking and questioning of each piece of evidence. It starts with only Juror 8 and his replica knife, disproving the guarantee of the knife the boy purchased and the knife that was used in the murder being the same knife. This sways only one person from changing their vote, but it is enough to spark more discussions of evidence leading to the woman across the el-tracks, whose testimony is discredited due to her glasses almost certainly not being on at the time she witnessed the

Show More
Related

Juror 8 In 'Twelve Angry Men' By Reginald Rose

683 Words | 3 Pages

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

Read More

Juror Four Argumentative Essay

568 Words | 3 Pages

Therefore, Juror Nine was able to conclude that “‘that no one can prove he wasn’t. He might have been at the movies and forgotten what he saw. It’s possible. If it’s perfectly normal for this gentleman to forget a few details, then it’s also perfectly normal for the boy. Being accused of murder isn’t necessarily supposed to give him an infallible memory.’”

Read More

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

Analyzing Reginald Rose's 'Twelve Angry Men'

745 Words | 3 Pages

This proves the boy is not guilty. The old man would not have been able to hear the kid yell over the passing of the El train. If this aspect of his testimony is inaccurate, it is certainly possible and very probable that other parts of his testimony are not true as well. In addition to this testimony, the woman across the El train also had a say in this case. For example, when the murder of the father took place, the woman claims to have been tossing and turning all night, as she rolled to the side of her room that had a window about ten minutes after twelve she observed the boy stabbing his father at that exact moment.

Read More

Relationship Between 8th And Evidence In 12 Angry Men

777 Words | 4 Pages

Juror wrap up by saying that even if he did hear him say, “I’m gonna kill you,” he might of just said that as a figure of speech without any attention behind his words. This is significant, because it highlights that some of the evidence is not irrefutable and makes them begin to doubt. Another incident that causes doubt is the evidence of the knife at the murder weapon. The boy stated that he lost it, but his friends and a shopkeeper said that it is the same knife that the boy had. 8th

Read More

12 Angry Men Juror 8

661 Words | 3 Pages

The train argument started with juror nine (the old man) noticing the marks on the ladies eyes then assuming that those marks were from glasses. To prove that he politely asked the man across from him (juror four) to take off his glasses to prove those marks were from glasses, and they were. Then he asked if juror four sleeps with his glasses on, and he didn’t. Juror nine is old and has trouble with words, juror eight noticed that juror nine was struggling and so he added his point which was related to juror nine’s point. And juror eights point was rejecting the woman’s point that she saw the boy stabbing his father through the train and heard the screams of the boy’s father.

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

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

502 Words | 3 Pages

In the play 12 Angry Men, a murder case is being reviewed by a jury. This jury must decide if a kid who killed his father is guilty or not. Two jurors that were on opposing sides for most of the play was Juror Eight and Juror Three. The reason they were on opposing sides was because Juror Three believed the kid was guilty, while Juror Eight believed there was not enough evidence to convict him. Most of the jurors wanted to settle on having reasonable doubt, so another jury could be called in.

Read More

Analytical Essay On 12 Angry Men

744 Words | 3 Pages

Juror 8 is the most significant persuader is the entire jury. He is the only person who believes the boy is not guilty. He makes several points that justify his reasoning. The first major point he makes is the switchblade knife. During the trial the prosecution assumed that that knife was one of a kind and no other person could have a knife like that.

Read More

Juror's Self-Image In Twelve Angry Men

692 Words | 3 Pages

In the movie Twelve Angry Men, the characters in the movie struggled with getting along with each other. As they talked about the case more and more the more the men got angry at each other. While the jurors argue, the characters and audience are forced to evaluate their own self-image through observing the beliefs, priorities, and the core values of the jurors. During the discussion of the case about the boy killing his father, the jury at the beginning didn’t focus on the other men’s beliefs.

Read More

12 Angry Men Heros

334 Words | 2 Pages

12 Angry Men - Heros In the play 12 Angry Men, there is an ongoing trial happening from a boy being accused of murdering his father. Many people vote guilty opposed to only a couple voting non guilty. Juror No 8.

Read More

Examples Of Factual Evidence In 12 Angry Men

341 Words | 2 Pages

In the play Twelve Angry Men, the jurors had to make a decision in determining if a young man accused of murder was guilty or innocent. Looking at the evidence presented, the boy was rightfully found not guilty. Two key reasons that support this conclusion are, the woman across the el tracks was not wearing her glasses, and the amateur stab wound compared to the boy's experience in knife fighting. These reasons demonstrate the lack of actual evidence against the boy.

Read More

How Does Juror Number 8 Trying To Raise Reasonable Doubt In 12 Angry Men

690 Words | 3 Pages

Lastly, the testimony given by the woman across the street was brought up and proven to not be 100% accurate. Juror #4 reminds everyone of what the woman said in her testimony, “She said that she went to bed at about eleven 0' clock that night. Her bed was next to the open window and she could look out of the window while lying down and see directly into the window across the street. She tossed and turned for over an hour, unable to fall asleep. Finally, she turned toward the window at about twelve-ten and, as she looked out, she saw the boy stab his father.”

Read More

Evidence In 12 Angry Men

488 Words | 2 Pages

We have the coincidence that the man was murdered just when the train was passing. Due to the proximity of the house and the noise the train emits the old man could not hear anyone scream. The man also argues that fifteen seconds after hearing those words and watching the father's body fall he watched the young man running down the hall. With the help of the building's plans the jury number eight showed that it was impossible for the man to see the young man running down the hallway only 15 seconds after hearing the scream according to the distance between him and the hall.

Read More

Examples Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men

640 Words | 3 Pages

The second witness, the old lady from the apartment building across the street says she saw the kid stick his father with a knife at 12:10. The story begins with the 12 jurors talking about the defendant, a 19 year old boy from the slums was accused of stabbing and killing his father. Most of the jurors automatically believed this because the boys had a bad reputation the others thought there wasn’t enough evidence to prove if he was guilty or not. At 15 the boy stole a car, he was arrested for mugging and for slashing another teenager with a knife and lastly, because he was from the slums and had an abusive father, which led the jurors to have their suspicions about him.

Read More

More about Juror's Guilt In 'Twelve Angry Men'

Open Document