12 Angry Men Essay
Jeffery Small 11/9/11
Ms. Stephens 310
12 Angry Men Essay
In the book “12 Angry Men” by Reginald Rose, a verdict of not guilty was given to the boy after the fact that apparently all the jurors except one thought that the boy was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. All of the key evidence presented in the court was rejected by the jury, which led the jurors to have a reasonable doubt about the boy’s guiltiness. This evidence in the book will go by chronological order and support why there is a reasonable doubt that would lead each juror to change their view of the case. In my opinion some of the counter evidence presented was kind of weak, but the whole point of this essay is to show the trail of evidence to lead the jurors to a reasonable doubt.
The first key idea, and probably the most important, is that the boy was poor and couldn’t afford a decent attorney. He had a court appointed attorney who probably had many other cases to argue. This attorney had no attachment to the client; there was no glory that the attorney could look towards. The attorney would really have to believe in the client in order to deliberate the case properly. It was pointed out in the movie that the boy had a very poor attorney and didn’t ask the right questions. If the boy had a good attorney, he would have brought up all the points that countered the key evidence that some of the jurors pointed out.
There are a few points about the knife that would lead to reasonable doubt. One point made in the courtroom was that the person who sold the boy the knife said it was one in a kind. It would be highly unlikely that another person would have the same knife. However juror #8 went to the area where the boy lived and bought the same exact knife from a pawnshop. This would prove that the knife wasn’t one of a kind, it was fairly common. This means that anyone could have bought the same knife and used it to kill the boy’s father. This evidence proves that the knife that
Ms. Stephens 310
12 Angry Men Essay
In the book “12 Angry Men” by Reginald Rose, a verdict of not guilty was given to the boy after the fact that apparently all the jurors except one thought that the boy was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. All of the key evidence presented in the court was rejected by the jury, which led the jurors to have a reasonable doubt about the boy’s guiltiness. This evidence in the book will go by chronological order and support why there is a reasonable doubt that would lead each juror to change their view of the case. In my opinion some of the counter evidence presented was kind of weak, but the whole point of this essay is to show the trail of evidence to lead the jurors to a reasonable doubt.
The first key idea, and probably the most important, is that the boy was poor and couldn’t afford a decent attorney. He had a court appointed attorney who probably had many other cases to argue. This attorney had no attachment to the client; there was no glory that the attorney could look towards. The attorney would really have to believe in the client in order to deliberate the case properly. It was pointed out in the movie that the boy had a very poor attorney and didn’t ask the right questions. If the boy had a good attorney, he would have brought up all the points that countered the key evidence that some of the jurors pointed out.
There are a few points about the knife that would lead to reasonable doubt. One point made in the courtroom was that the person who sold the boy the knife said it was one in a kind. It would be highly unlikely that another person would have the same knife. However juror #8 went to the area where the boy lived and bought the same exact knife from a pawnshop. This would prove that the knife wasn’t one of a kind, it was fairly common. This means that anyone could have bought the same knife and used it to kill the boy’s father. This evidence proves that the knife that