Preview

12 Angry Men Literary Analysis

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
847 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
12 Angry Men Literary Analysis
Don’t Believe Everything You Hear
12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose is a twisting story where a son is accussed of stabbing his father to death. Twelve strangers are told to listen to this court case and are then stuck in a small, hot room where they are told to decide on a verdict, whether or not the kid lives or dies. The jury finally decides on the verdict of : Not Guilty. Three major facts that influence the juries agreement that the accussed is not guilty include doubts of the murder weapon, doubts of the old man’s testimony, and doubts of the lady across the street’s testimony.
The first major fact that influences the juries agreement that the accussed is not guilty is the doubts of a key piece of evidence; the murder weapon, a switch knife. While discussing and examining the evidence, the switch knife that the accussed supposedly used to kill his father, Juror 8 flicks out his own switch knife to prove a point. “(Eight swiftly flicks open the blade of a switch knife, jams it into the wall next to the first knife and steps back. They are exactly alike. There are several gasps and everyone stares at the knife)” (562). This is very significant in persuading the jurors for the simple reason that Juror 8’s switch knife is exactly the same as the switch knife used in the murder; the same switch knife that is supposed to be “one-of-a-kind.” But it is now proven by this that anyone could have a knife like that, not just the accused young man. This situation starts to persuade the jurors that the acussed young man may not have killed his father, but rather someone else with the same knife.
The second major fact that influences the juries agreement that the accused is not guilty are the doubts of a witness’s testimony; the old man who supposedly heard the boy say, “I’ll kill you!” to his father, and a body fall to the floor. In order to settle the argument the jurors are having about the old man, who is a cripple, going to his door fifteen seconds after he heard the

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    In the 1957’s movie 12 Angry Men, it is about twelve jurors who have to come to a verdict whether or not the young boy is guilty for murdering his father. All but one juror said guilty. In the movie we see that jurors are using the arguments made by the witnesses and evidence found which were presented in court to help justify their decision and come to a conclusion on whether he is or isn’t guilty for killing his father. During this deliberation we can see emotion, reason and sense of perception being used by each juror to decide upon their verdict. Some questions that were raised during the movie were, do we make decisions based on our emotion? To what extent does the juror show to be rational or irrational? And In what ways are the eyewitness…

    • 141 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Juror 3 is a strong, forceful man who refuses to alter his vote. Being very opinionated, he looks at the evidence “you sat right there in court and heard the same things, I did” (14) and doesn’t think beyond the facts. Still haunted by his own son, he verbally assaults the other jurors with mighty tone that knowing that a kid like his son is going to be locked up. Juror 3 and his son had some troubles with their relationship in the past. Juror 3 comes right out and says that he was going to make a man out of his son or bust him trying. Which in the end his son slaps his father across the face finally beating him back for the first time and fled town; since that day they haven’t spoken or seen each other. Since juror 3 feels that his son was not the way he was supposed to turn out, his feelings of his son were building up inside of him and were faced towards the case of the convicted.…

    • 491 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In Monster, by Walter Dean Myers, the reader learns from Steve Harmon’s experiences that sometimes guilt or innocence of a person might not be determined by solid evidence but by onlooker’s opinions and interpretation of the crime. There is not a large amount of scientific evidence in the case against Steve Harmon, so the jury must rely on Steve’s background information, their opinions of guilt and innocence, and the testimonies of the witnesses who are mostly criminals.…

    • 602 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    12 Angry Men: Overview

    • 1553 Words
    • 7 Pages

    1. Each Act takes happens in the same place. The entire play takes place in the jury room of a New York City court of law in 1957 during a very hot summer afternoon. It is a large, dull, minimalistic room with three windows in the brick wall which the skyline of New York City can be seen. There is also a wash room and lavatory off the jury room. There is a large, scarred table in the centre with twelve chairs around it. There are pencils pads and an ashtray on the table. There is also a water cooler in the room with plastic cups. The dullness of the room may signify and provide a mood for the act and is evident in the interactions between the jurors. The Twelve jurors are all seemingly awkward and uneasy towards each other once they enter the room.…

    • 1553 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    These details will prove the boy is censurable. During the play, juror number eight pushes the jury to rule the boy as inculpable. The first thing he confutes is the uniqueness of the knife. He verbalizes that there are multiple knives identical to the one that the father was killed with.…

    • 555 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    He also accustomed to forcing his wishes and views upon others (1). Therefore, during the developing of the voting, Juror Three try to force people to admit his prejudice continuously. If people do not agree his view and vote for not guilty, he is angry and interrupt other Jurors’ discussion. Even though other jurors support appropriate assumption and evidence to prove the murder is not guilty, Juror Three do not believe and keep his prejudice which has logical fallacies. For example, when Juror Nine change his vote in the second voting for not guilty, and want to explain the reason why he change his mind, Juror Three answers, “No, we wouldn’t like to know why”(12). When Juror Eight try to measure how long the old man can walk in 15 minutes, and walk as slowly as the old man who uses canes. However, Juror Three says, “You made it sound like a long walk. It’s not,” (19) and when Juror Eleven thinks Juror Eight’s behavior can be an important point. Juror Three declares, “It’s a ridiculous waste of time”…

    • 653 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Biased testimony towards the defendant resulted in a prejudice jury. Very frequently, statements like ‘We heard the facts, didn’t we?’ or ‘Pay attention to the facts’ are expressed in the jury room. The 4th Juror cited that the murder weapon was a knife so unique that ‘the storekeeper who sold it to him identified the knife in court and said it was the only one of its kind he ever had in stock.’ The 8th Juror argues that ‘It’s possible that the boy lost the knife and that someone else stabbed his father with a similar knife.’ None of the Juror’s believes this possibility as they have already established their prejudices against the accused. The 10th Juror says ‘Let’s talk facts. These people are born to lie… They think different. They act different.’ These are not ‘facts’ but prejudice opinions made by the 10th Juror about the socio-economic status of the boy. It can assumed that the ‘facts’ presented in this case can be viewed as biased opinions and reports that impairs the true facts.…

    • 853 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    People whom observe the judicial system from afar can come to the conclusion that justice may be “blind”. However, this is not always true. In Rose’s piece of writing, it becomes the duty of twelve jurors to “try and separate the facts from the fancy” (Rose, 5). This means that the jurors would have to decide whether or not a 16-year-old boy was guilty of allegedly stabbing his father to death and committing “murder in the first degree- premeditated homicide” (Rose, 5).…

    • 813 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    A final piece of evidence comes from the murder weapon, which the boy admits he bought; the prosecution states that the switch knife is incredibly unique and is not sold in any of the nearby areas. However, a juror is able to find an identical knife sold in the same area, which once again proves there is a reasonable doubt in the case. Throughout the play it is made apparent that the defense for the boy was lacking, and they did not strike many of the necessary possible jurors during voir dire. For instance, Juror 10 is a complete bigot who believes anyone who comes from a poor area, like the boy, is not trustworthy. In the play the jurors unanimously decide on a not guilty verdict based on the untrustworthy evidence. After their hours of careful discussion, it is clear that their decision was not made hastily, which once again shows that the lacking defense led to the appearance of guilt. In this fictional case, many jurors pushed for a hung jury, however, ultimately it was decided that evidence made possibility for reasonable doubt, and delivered a not guilty…

    • 450 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Analysis Of 12 Angry Men

    • 610 Words
    • 3 Pages

    For fans of courtroom dramas and crime television, these court case movies all revolve around the courtroom. Unlike the orderly process of a real courtroom, the stories are filled with drama, intrigue and corruption. Getting to the truth is seldom as straightforward as it appears within these hit movies.…

    • 610 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The play, “Twelve Angry Men” is of how there could’ve been flaws in the Judicial system; however one juror tries to prove that the man isn’t guilty and persuades the others to follow his reasoning. One of the many themes is reasonable doubt, meaning a doubt of the guilt in a criminal due to lack of evidence or thorough examination. Reginald Rose feels that reasonable doubt is often portrayed in many real life juries partly because of testimonies, lawyers, consideration, and facts or opinions.…

    • 358 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    There was other concrete evidence in which the decision should be based; the Architect believes that his age makes him less likely to commit the crime. Following this statement, the jurors may have began to think of the suspect as a young innocent boy and not have him in such a negative light, although the Architect was not successful in persuading members of the jury. This fallacy could have been avoided if he only called out the fallacy the Father committed in the previous statement (“The man’s a dangerous killer. You could see it.”). He could have said he is not a dangerous killer until they find the evidence to prove so; rather than countering a fallacy with another…

    • 752 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men Response

    • 812 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The setting of 12 Angry Men is a jury deliberation room where the jurors are and required to decide the guilt or innocence of an 18 year old that is accused of committing first-degree murder by stabbing his father with a switchblade knife. Witnesses were presented to give evidence of hearing a quarrel; hearing a threat to kill, and have seeing the boy run away. Another witness swore to having seen the boy stabbing his father from a window across from where the murder occurred. Eleven jurors were convinced the boy was guilty and deserved the death penalty. One raised questions he felt had not been asked or had not been pursued by the defense.…

    • 812 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    2. Each juror changed his mind at one point because they all contained doubt. One of the first man to present doubt was the architect who was the first man to bring upon the idea that the boy might, in face, be innocent. He did an outstanding job of bringing to the table all of these reasons why the kid is innocent and as a result, the men in the room slowly began to agree with him. Some of the reasons he believed the kid was innocent was because of the time it took the old man to reach the door to see the boy, the loud train in the back round, the old lady’s bad eye sight, the fact that he couldn’t remember the title of the movie, etc. By the end, there was only one guy left who would not believe this mans thoughts and it turns out it was because he had a bad relationship with his some that which scarred him. Finally he accepted the fact that the kid was innocent.…

    • 1469 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    12 Angry Men speech

    • 705 Words
    • 3 Pages

    12 Angry Men is a filmed based on the theme of reasonable doubt. A jury of twelve men are chosen to determine whether the eighteen year old boy killed his father or not. The initial evidence that includes two eye witnesses would suggest that this case is a closed decision and they boy will surely be found guilty. The jury does not take long before coming to a vote ending in 11 votes for guilty 1 vote for non guilty. The man who voted for not guilty saw loop holes in the evidence and in turn saw reasonable doubt to vote not guilty. As the movie progresses the jurors discusses ever critical part of evidence, discussing possible alternative to explaining the events. The evidence delivered at the trial, was thought to be justifiable by all but one of the jurors. Than man who opposed the entire jury was the only one who did not assumed that the evidence was the truth and not exaggerated.…

    • 705 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays