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…
In the movie twelve angry man, after the twelve jurors listened to the facts in the trail, the judge gives her instructions to them. The judge told them that the man could face the death penalty if he found guilty. The 12 man gather in a stifling hot room to have a concluding about the case. They start arguing and adding their own experience, culture, and understanding of people's motives as a way of reconsidering the facts. Although all the jurors had listened to the same stated facts and they were in the same situation, each one of them interprets the facts differently. This reflects the differences in people and the different ways that we view the same things.…
This is why the film Twelve Angry Men suggest that The United States Judicial system is very unfair to the person being tried because they don't check into the juror members enough which can lead to a very unfair jury…
The movie 12 Angry Men depicts a typical scene today: twelve jury members meeting to discuss a case presented to them and determine guilt or innocence of a young man accused of killing his own father. Usually the jury room is a place for discussion and debate, but the evidence has swayed all but one of the jurors into voting guilty. The group in the movie is a jury of 12 men with various backgrounds and age groups. They were placed in a deliberation room where the entire move took place.…
In the drama Twelve Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, there are twelve jurors to discuss and deliberate if the murder in the first degree is guilt or not. Because the verdict must be unanimous, twelve jurors have a critical thinking in their discussion and finally made the vote from eleven jurors vote for guilty to unanimous vote for not guilty. During the development of the voting, Juror Three is hardly to persuade because he has a serious prejudice to the murder. If Juror Three does not admit the murder is not guilty, they cannot settle a lawsuit. Therefore, Juror Three’s prejudice should be the key to get the final verdict.…
Throughout the years of America, we had many juries during criminal trials to decide if the defendant guilty or not guilty. In the 1957 movie, 12 Angry Men shows the best representation of American jury system and how people change their minds. 12 Angry Men shows that personal feeling get in the way in their votes. The movie is about how 12 jurors decide the fate of young boy that persumed he killed his father, while during the initial vote only Juror 8 raised his hand not guilty. Then throughout the movie and script each of the 11 jurors for various reason change their votes to not guilty. The 12 jurors change their votes from guilty to not guilty through character flaws, positive personality traits, expertise on the evidence, and pattern of behavior.…
At the conception of Twelve Angry Men, Rose exposes the audience to the devastating heat in the jury room which over looks the "New York sky line" on what is described as "the hottest day of the the year". At this stage it is revealed to the audience the apathetic nature of jury members, uninterested in the "grave responsibility" they have in deciding the fate of the "16 year old boys life" and more interested with the goal of escaping the plain, oven like jury room. With each juror being blinded by the thick glaze of heat In front of them a verdict of guilty becomes the instinctive state of mind and the room for reasonable doubt is eliminated from all but one. The author, Reginald Rose displays through juror 8 that to be doubtful when challenging a majority becomes a harder state of mind, "as it's not easy to stand alone against the ridicule of other" at this moment juror 8 initiates his campaign that we can never be certain about anything, we can only make assumptions based on the information provided.…
With a wide cast of characters, it is truly courtroom television. Almost the entire movie is filmed entirely in the jury's deliberation room. At the beginning of 12 Angry Men(http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/), the characters have just heard the testimony and evidence against a man accused of murder. The case initially seems to be obviously against the defendant, and 11 out of 12 jurors agree that he is guilty. One juror remains who is not entirely convinced that the man is guilty of murder. Over the course of the film, this individual gradually swings more and more of the jury to his side of the argument.…
2. Do you think that the film Twelve Angry Men promotes the jury system or speaks out against it? Explain using evidence from the film.…
As we walked into the jury room, after hearing the case of Commonwealth v. Miller, I had already decided how I would vote and, honestly, I determined I was not going to be swayed. We swiftly chose a foreman by appointing the one, who had been given the jury instructions, to that position. Next, we read the jury instructions out loud, in order to remember and understand the definition of each charge. Debate over the meaning of the instructions ensued for a short amount of time before we dove into determining guilt or innocence. Everyone was given a chance to discuss the case and, personally, I felt comfortable entering the discussion and debating the case. After discussion, we voted and were evenly split among guilty or not guilty. Next, we…
The American Revolution was the cause of a buildup of events. The rise of the revolution was brought on by a series of events, these are the main reasons as to why the American Revolution happened, the Intolerable Acts and the formation of the Stamp Act Congress. The Intolerable acts were a set of laws that colonists deemed unfair. These acts were put into place after the Boston Tea Party.…
The juror’s recognized and valued that they were participating in a key pillar of democracy, a fair and unbiased jury. Juror #11 mentions the importance of this, saying to the jury that “This is a remarkable thing about democracy. That we are…ummmm… what is the word… Ah, notified! That we are notified by mail to come down to this place and decide on the guilt or innocence of a man we have not known before.…
The American jury system, wherein citizens are judged by their peers, is one of the most democratic in the world. Nonetheless our system is far from perfect. There are many dangers in a system in which humans are asked to make decisions that could mean life or death for another person. Bias ranks amongst these dangers for it can affect the way jurors interpret testimonies and facts. Indifference is another factor; it too, can heavily affect a juror’s thinking. Personal feelings and experiences can stand in between a juror and the attainment of truth. The American jury system is intrinsically flawed in that it relies on intrinsically flawed humans to make life or death decisions…
jurors (Sommers, 2007). As a result, the concerns and questions pertaining to the internal validity…
Jurors perform a key part in the American arrangement of equity. The assurance of our rights and freedoms is to a great extent accomplished through the collaboration of judge and jury who, cooperating in a typical exertion, put into practice the standards of our extraordinary legacy of flexibility. The judge decides the law to be connected in the case while the jury chooses the truths. Therefore, in an imperative manner, members of the jury turn into a piece of the court itself. The American criminal justice system is the arrangement of practices and organizations of governments steered at maintaining social control, dissuading and moderating wrongdoing, or authorizing the individuals who disregard laws with criminal punishments and restoration exertions.…