ipl-logo

'Plea Bargain In A Few Good Men'

770 Words4 Pages

“A Few Good Men” demonstrates how the American court system works. Daniel Kaffee the Defense Attorney with help from Sam Weinberg and Joanne Galloway are assigned to represent Harold Dawson and Louden Downey in a murder trial against prosecutor Jack Ross. Five themes that were shown are plea bargains can be made anywhere, a Defense Attorney represents their clients throughout, prosecutors represent the government, and witnesses are hard to get. These themes were all emphasized in the courts chapter. I watched the movie through a free download website called spacemov. From the start of the movie Daniel Kaffee shows how a plea bargain saves time and can be made anywhere. He made a deal with Jack Ross while playing softball that the man he …show more content…

Daniel Kaffee explained that the jury is looking for someone to blame. So even if their client is not guilty they need to find someone who is guilty for that crime and prove it to the jury. Kaffee also stated “It is not what I believe it is what I can prove” Once they proved that Colonel Jessup was responsible the jury put the blame on him making Dawson and Downey not guilty. Another theme displayed in the movie which we learned in the court chapter was how hard it is to get a witness to testify. This was emphasized in class. Daniel Kaffee got a witness that knew the truth and was going to help Kaffee. The day before he was going to testify he ended up killing himself. A lot of people do not want to go before a judge and testify because it can come back and hurt them. Shown in the movie also is how they train a witness to answer questions quickly. The witness can not hesitate because it can look like they are not telling the truth. Joanne sat with Downey and trained him to answer questions quickly. In the chapter, we learned that the judge can decide whether a witness is an expert or not. In the movie, the judge ordered the doctor as an expert even though Kaffee did not agree. The movie really emphasized how hard it is to get

Show More
Related

Rhetoric Techniques Used In A Criminal Court Case

760 Words | 4 Pages

The film does an effective job in accurately portraying the events that occur in a criminal court case, which consist of “choosing a jury, opening statements, witness testimony and cross-examination, closing arguments, jury deliberation and verdict” according to FindLaw.com. To begin, Dawson and Downey are charged before the trial can take place, with the murder of Private William Santiago. This demonstrates the pre-trial step of arraignment or initial sentencing. Although the process of selecting a jury is omitted, it is briefly referenced. Kaffee does in fact mention that the jury will be made up of other Marines and officials qualified to preside over the case.

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

The Crucible Judge Palmer Effect

340 Words | 2 Pages

We concluded on the scene in which, Judge Palmer is going through trial and he takes the stand. We would title this scene as “The Verdict” because ultimately this is the point when Judge Palmer receives his sentence. Even though, the meaning of the movie is about a dysfunctional relationship between a father and a son, the movie is essentially based on a crime scene which, Judge Palmer is the suspect. Judge Palmer is being accused of Blackwell an ex-convict’s murder, which he had sentenced to twenty years in prison. However, Judge Palmer has no recollection of the event.

Read More

Ethos, Pathos, Pathos And Logos In 12 Angry Men

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

Analysis Of Stereotypes In 12 Angry Men

747 Words | 3 Pages

Based on the evidence gathered from the case everyone agrees the boy is innocent except one man, juror three. He eventually breaks down and consequently tells the truth. The viewers can tell that this movie/play is full of emotions. Each of these emotions can be described as something more than what comes to the eye.

Read More

Analytical Essay On 12 Angry Men

744 Words | 3 Pages

He is a rational stockbroker who analyzes the case from every angle. He focused on facts and not much else. His verdict was guilty throughout the majority of the movie. His reasoning was the lady who claimed to see the puerto-rican boy kill his father from out her window across the street. He said that all the other evident could be thrown out due to this evidence.

Read More

12 Angry Men Assessment: 12 Angry Men

755 Words | 4 Pages

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.

Read More

Examples Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men

915 Words | 4 Pages

Throughout the whole play, Juror Ten remains stubborn in his decision that the defendant is guilty. Yet, at the end the finally sees that there is reasonable doubt (62). Interestingly enough, on the previous page Juror Ten is called out by Juror Four (60). The foreman also has some prejudice at the beginning of the case. He brings up another case that is similar to the one they are doing.

Read More

Minority Influence In 12 Angry Men

1458 Words | 6 Pages

Mobashshir Arshad Ansari DM 16230 The movie “12 Angry Men” is a court drama based movie. The entire film takes place within a small New York City jury room, on "the hottest day of the year," as 12 men debate the fate of a young defendant charged with murdering his father. Most courtroom movies feel it necessary to end with a clear-cut verdict. But "12 Angry Men" never states whether the defendant is innocent or guilty if innocent then who is guilty.

Read More

Examples Of Social Injustice In 12 Angry Men

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

Fallacies In 12 Angry Men

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

Who Is 12 Angry Men Inhibit Critical Thinking

572 Words | 3 Pages

12 Angry Men is a movie about twelve jurors who discussing about a murder case of a teenage boy. The play is set in New York City Court of Law jury room in 1957. The decision to sentence the boy to death penalty lies upon these twelve gentlemen. Although, eleven of them found him guilty based on some ambiguous evidence, one man voted not guilty and started a promotion amongst them. This man is the one we should call the hero of the day since he pointed out all the missing points of the case leads to the innocent of the teenage boy.

Read More

How Does The Juror Use Sense Perceptions In 12 Angry Men

1183 Words | 5 Pages

The man’s a dangerous killer. You could see it." He hasn’t proved anything by saying this he just believes the young boy is guilty by thinking that everything that he heard in the courtroom was true. As well as believing that the woman’s eye witness testimony, which was that she saw the boy stab his father across the street. As juror ten states that “she swore she saw him do it” while there was a passing train.

Read More

Justice In The Film A Few Good Men

1035 Words | 5 Pages

The only way Kaffee could get his clients (the two soldiers convicted of crime) away from a long jail-sentence was by proving, in court, that the Colonel had in fact ordered a “Code Red”, which the latter was most-zealously denying. Eventually, the skilled advocate was able to get the Colonel to such a state of irritation that he admitted ordering a “Code Red”. Without individual persistence and zealous advocacy Kaffee would have long lost the case, but he proved, through that trial, that a professional advocate should always stand by his client, in the most devoted way possible, to ensure a fair trial and preservation of

Read More

The Argument Against The Crowd In The Film 12 Angry Men

961 Words | 4 Pages

Early in the movie all men, except one juror, number eight, agree that the boy is guilty without a doubt. In this case normative influencer took place which is going along with the crowd in order to be liked or accepted. Juror eight was the only person from the beginning of the deliberation to the end of it that thought the boy was innocent and he had to basically break down all the men to understand why it was true. Also some of the men did not care if the boy was a person who deserved a fair trial because in their eyes he was not like them and they knew people like his kind to be

Read More

More about 'Plea Bargain In A Few Good Men'

Related Topics

Open Document