Juror #10 is the character who brings in the most prejudice to the jury room as he has formed his decision from the moment he saw the young boy and sees no reason for him to waste any time debating on whether the defendant is guilty. His prejudice comes from the fact he used to live in the “slums” and consider people like the defendant to be “trash”. This is established when he states “you can’t believe a word they say…they act different… they don’t need any big excuse to kill someone.” Juror #10 never really considers the facts of the case only using them as a pretext to vote guilty and to leave early. When he found it too difficult to change people’s opinions he simply gave up and voted not guilty. “I couldn’t care less”. This shows just how little he cared for the defendant’s life and the jury system unlike juror #3 who deeply cared about the jury system and the case.…
In the book, Prisoner B-3087, the main character, Yanek, is a smart, creative person who wants to work in movies. Yank is all of these because in the book it says “It was a slide projector I’d made by mounting a light bulb on a piece of wood and positioning wooden plates with lenses from magnifying glasses in front of it.” (4) This quote describes him being smart and creative because most kids don’t make a slide projector, that works well, and he puts western shadow puppet shows on with it, as it says on pages four through five.…
Reginald Rose's play, Twelve Angry Men, takes place in the 'jury-room of the New York Court of Law' in 1957, and explores how the persistence and determination of juror 8 eventually influences the other jurors into changing their minds about the verdict. Juror 8, the protagonist of the play, continually questions the veracity of the evidence in order to persuade other jurors to think about reasonable doubt. He goes out of his way to attempt to make other jurors deliberate about the murder. Even though the 8th juror broke the law by submitting the ‘one of a kind’ switchblade knife in the jury room the evidence was put into good hands and became a positive element towards the end of the play. The 8th Jurors intellectuality of twisting facts around is an important component that tests the…
The leader in the beginning of the deliberation was the high school football coach, juror number one. He tries to keep order in the hostile jury room. The role evolve to the Architect in the course of the film because he was the only odd ball in the room who vote not guilty and he manage to change everyone vote by the end of the film. His successful strategies for leading the group include encouraging equal and inclusive participation and taking time to deliberate slowly.…
The book To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee and the book Mississippi Trial, 1955 by Chris Crowe are two different books surround by the same ideas. To Kill a Mockingbird was a book about a girl named Scout, whose dad, Atticus, is a lawyer, who tried to win a case defending an innocent black man. Atticus did not win the case and Scout started to learn about injustice and what went on at that time in the South. Mississippi Trial, 1955 was about a boy named Hiram, who lived in the South with his grandpa because his parents were too busy working. His grandpa represented the South in the book and Hiram’s dad represented the North, and Hiram had a stronger relationship with his grandpa and did not really like his dad at the time. After a trial involving…
In a crowded jury room in downtown New York, opinions collide as discussion about the innocence of a young boy is decided. The dark and foreboding storm clouds that hang over the heads of the jurors are beginning to lift as time progresses and new facts are presented. One juror is not happy about this stay of execution and is holding fast his opinion of guilty. Juror three, the president of his business, refuses to alter his vote or opinion in any way. Still haunted by his own son, juror three verbally assaults the group with a forceful tone and a taciturn attitude. One of twelve, Reginald Rose created them all from the same pen and ink, and they could all be no more different.…
My favorite person in the movie of 12 angry men was especially juror number 8 and the old man juror 9, also juror number 6. The reason i liked juror number 8 is because, juror 8 didn’t agree guilty right away just like the other jurors, number 8 really wanted to explain why everyone voted guilty. He didn’t right away think that the kid was really a murderer,because of the father as the court had said that the father was abusive and that the kid was everywhere as an orphan but so long to be beaten, number 8 thought after so long of taking all that abuse, who wouldn’t? And how number 8 really got everyone to really think about sending a kid to the electric chair, how he got everyone to vote not guilty. Also the reason i liked juror number 9 too…
The characters in the movie do not have names but rather, are referred to by their sitting order on the jury. The main character is a man only known as juror #8 until, at the end of the movie, you find out his name is Davis. You do not learn the names of the other jurors. The main character is the only juror to vote not guilty to begin with. All the jurors have their own characters that play into the movie and show prejudice ignorance, preconceived notions of the case, and other hidden traits that play a part in the movie. For example, one of the jurors lives in the same style of neighborhood as the man. Another thinks all people from the poor side of town are low-lifes and thinks that killing is in their nature so that sentencing one more to death will not matter.…
Part one: Character Identification: Describe who the characters are and what relationship they share with the main character.…
Juror number 8 came with a reasonable argument to the jurors that changes the 9th juror’s perspective. The argument convinces the 9th juror to be an advocate for the boy/support the boy. Even though the 9th juror is convinced and sees the case from a different view than before, the other jurors are still not convinced. The 8th juror makes a tough but smart decision when voting to take time and sit and talk a bit more throught the case to find a conclusion. At first he says that the defendant is not guilty but he then reevaluates his decision and says “i don’t know.”…
In A Jury of Her Peers, Glaspell reveals the struggle of what is right to your friends and what is your legal duty. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters, Minnie Wright’s unexpected peers, have much more in common than what meets the eye. As they begin their investigation through the Wright home; things appear to be much more obvious than previously motioned, but the unfolding of their blossoming friendship could end up putting Mrs. Minnie in the doghouse instead.…
Juror #10 is the character who brings in the most prejudice to the jury room as he has formed his decision…
In this paper I will provide an analysis of a jury trial; my analysis will focus on the right of the defendant. I will articulate how a defendant 's rights at trial can be assured when it comes to The defendant’s right to a speedy trial, the defendant’s right to an impartial judge and the defendant’s right to an impartial jury.…
In the United States of America, the criminal justice system is based on the adversarial system or common law system. An adversarial trial allows the accused or defendant to be given a fair chance to prove his or her innocence. The Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that the defendant is to be given a fair chance to oppose the prosecution, have witnesses to help with his or her defense, face and question the complainant, and for his or her case to be heard by a group of people who are unbiased and impartial. This group is known as the trial jury.…
each juror has there own deficiencies or less than ideal qualities, these emerge through their interactions with eachother or their attitudes towards their trial. juror 10 is predjudice regularly using stereotypes to condemn the defendsant without actually considering if what he is saying is true. such as ‘a very big drinker’ or a born liar’ the third juror is guilty of stereotyping the defendant based on age, and he defends his opinions and stereotypes violently in the jury room, such as his near attack on 8th juror at the end of the first act. the play does not let a single character escape unflawed. even 8th juror,…