ipl-logo

Leadership In 12 Angry Men

746 Words3 Pages

12 Angry Men Twelve Angry man is an old black and white popular movie of 1957. Sidney Arthur Lumet, the director of the movie tells the story of a jury and their importances for making a decisions under different circumstances. The play was about a young man on trial for the murder of his father. In the movie, the jury had to take decision on either the young man is guilty or not. The play showed that one man didn't give up till the end and showed up what he believed is to be true. In this movie, we can see that persuasive argument is employed by one single juror to provide the evidence and made all other juror to believe that the boy should not be punished. In these movie the juror 8 shows the leadership vision. Juror 8 display a great leadership example by explaining events to other juror and able to get his points across the other juror. He was able to proves that the boy is not guilty for killing his father. In his arguments, the 8th …show more content…

The judged assigned them to find that the boy is guilty or not guilty. After that the play begins and all the juror member have to share their views and opinion with each other and keep in mind the judged instruction and come up with a solution. They have to co-ordinate with each other and listen to each other. In the movie they try to make decisions with voting and discussed all matters. Juror 8 plays a main role in the movie. He was only juror to cast a non guilty vote on the murder case involving a boy stab his father to death. He believe that it would be erroneous to execute a boy without prior discussion. He seems to be very optimistic and doesn’t want to make any false decisions without any prove and didn’t want boy to get a death penalty without fair decisions. He examined all the things and at the end he proved all 11 jurors evidence contains

Show More
Related
560 Words | 3 Pages

He argues with juror eight to the point where juror three enragedly screams “I will kill him!” Just because juror three says he will kill juror eight does not mean he actually will. Making juror eight's point clear that when the defendant screamed he was going to kill his father that he may not have really meant it. Creating reasonable doubt for six men, exactly what eight wanted. Juror twelve states that the debate was getting nowhere.

Read More
757 Words | 4 Pages

The 8th juror does not hear the FOREMAN…” (Rose 10). This is important because instead of following the group, and their decision, he was in deep in thought about the case, reflecting on all the explanation that were given in the trial. Juror 8 wasn’t going have the other 11 jurors roll over the trial, while in the meeting he says, “There were 11 votes for ‘guilty’. It’s not easy for me to… send a boy off to die without talking…”

Read More
705 Words | 3 Pages

Juror Eight, challenges the others to reconsider their initial assumptions and prejudices. The play highlights themes of prejudice, empathy, and the power of individual conscience to shape collective decisions. It serves as a powerful critique of the jury system and a testament to the importance of critical thinking and empathy in achieving justice. Reginald Rose was nominated and won awards for this amazing film. Some awards that Reginaldnal Rose won include, best drama, best film, best motion picture, and best drama.

Read More
410 Words | 2 Pages

“12 Angry Men,” by Reginald Rose, is a dramatic play. Twelve jurors were sent into a jury room to decide the destiny of a 19-year-old boy. Distressingly, he was convicted of murdering his father. At the beginning of the play, the jurors take a vote, and every juror votes guilty; except Juror 8. Throughout the play, they disprove different testimonies such as an old man's testimony and a stab wound.

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
814 Words | 4 Pages

In the process of this he allows each of them to carry a symbol through their actions and personalities. Sadly, most of jurors let personal experience or their unfair judgments take over their decision to execute the 16-yrear old boy. For example, Juror number four is painted as a very logical and persistent character simply due to the fact he is always basing his

Read More
695 Words | 3 Pages

The one man who believes that the child is not guilty is the one who changes everyone’s mind. Juror number eight made a change by using evidence, got everyone to commit to one answer and got everyone to realize who they

Read More
412 Words | 2 Pages

Many end up admiring Eight's perseverance, determination to uncover the truth, and thoughtful nature. However, it has frequently been asked whether he might be the only one to differ, solely because he has something to hide and knows something the others do not. By his incredibly defensive view, one could conclude that he was the killer. He constantly describes the boy's awful childhood and background with pity and has a peculiar perspective on the knife used. He immediately presents a weapon identical to the one used at the crime scene, bought in the same neighbourhood of the accused night before.

Read More
1016 Words | 5 Pages

In the novel, 12 jurors were deciding whether a boy who is accused of killing his father is guilty or not. The jurors in the room, especially 3. Juror created a perception that the boy was guilty. Nearly all of the jurors thought that the boy was guilty except 8. Juror.

Read More
577 Words | 3 Pages

However, he was very firm with his point of view and his uncertainty of the guilty and did not change his not guilty verdict to make the others happy. Some of the men in the jury were quite demeaning and only saw their own point of view, yet Juror #8 continued to keep his patience while others around him began to lose their temper. Of course, with the only fan in the room not working and blood level rising between the men, it grew to be extremely difficult to not grow angry easily. For instance, even after difficulty until the very end with the resentful, angry Juror #3, Juror #8, after finalizing the strenuous tally, brought the defeated man his jacket and gently helped him put it on. All in all, Juror #8 played a strong, significant role in the trial outcome by proving to all eleven men that the young man may not have been guilty.

Read More
842 Words | 4 Pages

They all try to convince Juror eight that his decision is incorrect, they think that he is making a clear mistake since the evidence they have leads them to easily believe that the boy is guilty. Juror eight does not care, he is going to stand up for the young man and what he believes happened at the night of the crime scene. For example, Juror eight announces, “There were 11 votes for guilty-it’s not so easy for me to raise my hand without talking about it first” (15). It takes a lot of courage and confidence to stand your ground in front of eleven people that are constantly trying to prove you wrong. Since everyone voted guilty, it is not easy for Juror eight to speak up about his vote.

Read More
584 Words | 3 Pages

The jurors gave juror eight a hard time from the beginning. His opinion was thought to be crazy and almost impossible considering the amount of evidence against the defendant. As the movie went on juror eight began to explain his reasonings in a logical way and even acted out some of his thoughts. Respecting the opinions of others helped them become more equipped to reach the verdict. The men working together to reach a verdict is an example of a work/task

Read More
990 Words | 4 Pages

Juror 8 Shows that he does respect his work as a juror and has the responsibility to be an juror by standing against the other jurors For example When Juror 7 said “Well, What’s there to talk about ? Eleven men here agree. Nobody had to think twice about it except you.” (Rose 12)

Read More
1394 Words | 6 Pages

The 3rd Juror seems to be prejudiced against the accused simply because of his age, which seems to remind him of his son. From a psychological point of view, Juror 3 is projecting his anger from his own son onto the accused boy, which explains why at the end he cried when he was finally convinced that the boy was guilty, it was a way of showing how these tears refer to forgiving his son. I also believe that Juror 8 is one of the examples of prejudice in an opposite way, as he was the first one who was sympathetic to the accused, not because of the available evidence, but because he pitied his poor life and troubled background. Juror 10 is a passionate person like Juror 3, but in a more prejudice way.   He is convinced that the accused did it, not because of evidence presented, but because the accused grew up in the slums.

Read More
630 Words | 3 Pages

Leadership and roles are depicted throughout the whole movie by many different jurors. The designated leader of the jury group was Juror #1. Juror #1 was when they first entered into the room but Juror #8 took the emergent role when he declined to agree with a guilty verdict. His rejection to agree in a guilty verdict was crucial since he voiced his uncertainty to the evidence at a early stage.

Read More

More about Leadership In 12 Angry Men

Open Document