Preview

Twelve Angry Men

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
591 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Twelve Angry Men
11th juror
11th juror is a watchmaker and he’s German. Because he’s a watchmaker, he has attention to fine detail and is precise. He sticks to the facts and bases the evidence on facts. He’s one who has been taking notes throughout the whole case. On page 29, he says, “Pardon me, but I have made some notes here” and “I have been listening very closely” so that shows how much attention he pays and how he sticks to the facts. He has received prejudice and stereotyping for being German and is bullied by the other jurors. On page 12 he says, “This sensitivity I understand” when the 5th juror reveals how he’s lived in a slum all his life. 11th juror relates to this because of the prejudice he’s received. 7th juror bullies him on page 44 when he says, “I’ll knock his goddamn Middle European head off” and “they’re all alike” referring to the Germans. 11th juror remains calm and polite and says “Please, please. It doesn’t matter.” This shows how he is different from the other jurors and does not bully back. He tries to get his opinion across but many times is cut off by jurors. On page 20 he says, “Please I would like to say something here” but doesn’t say what he thinks until page 29 when he presents good arguments. He says, “Why would he come back three hours later?” and “But if he knew the knife could be identified, why did he leave it there in the first place?” Now somebody other than juror 8 is presenting the facts and this also supports how he has attention to fine detail. He starts to change his mind on this page when he believes they should go deeper. By the third vote on page 31, he changes his vote to not guilty hesitantly. He may not want to be ridiculed by others and that’s why he “slowly raises his hand”. He stands up to juror 7 on page 50 and says, “You have no right to play like that with a man’s life” and “If you want to vote not guilty, then do it because you’re convinced the man is not guilty – not because you’ve had enough” He has had enough of

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    He believes that Juror 8 and Juror 9’s input is driven by biases that are “a bit far-fetched” (Act I, page 32). However, Juror 8, as the center of the discussion, constructively points out certain aspects of the case the makes Juror 4 skeptical about Juror 8’s statements. For example, when Juror 8 wonders how long it takes for an elevated train to pass a given point, Juror 4 inquisitively states, “All right. Say ten Seconds. What are you getting at?” (Act I, page 34). This conveys that he understands that Juror 8 has a point to make, but his intentions are not truly rational in accordance with the facts. Furthermore, Juror 4 claims “You’ve made some excellent points. The last one… was very persuasive. But I still believe the boy is guilty of murder. I have two reasons. One: the evidence given by the woman across the street who actually saw the murder committed. Two: the fact that the woman described the stabbing…” (Act II, page 66). According to Juror 4, the woman’s claim makes logical sense. Although Juror 4 is not yet convinced that the young man is not a murderer, he does value Juror 8’s…

    • 1257 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Eyewitness In 12 Angry Men

    • 1026 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The film 12 Angry Men is about a murder trial conducted in a courtroom. The judge gave the jury its final instruction telling them that a guilty verdict will result in a death sentence for the defendant, an 18-year-old boy who was accused of murdering his father using a knife! One juror had a personal connection with the case. He has not seen his son for more than two years. He claims that the young boy is guilty and that all young kids are criminals. The juror has bias towards the trial because he see his son in the young boy. Out of the twelve jurors, eleven jurors voted for conviction. Another juror states that he has doubts about the case and hopes to give the boy a favorable decision. The young boy had a hard life living in the slum. A third juror claims that each of the…

    • 1026 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The generalisations established by certain Jurors, makes them oblivious to the facts before them. Characters rely on generalised stereotypes to support their prejudices against those of a lower-socio economic status. The 10th Juror says to other Jurors ‘the kids who crawl outta those places are real trash’ and the 4th Juror states ‘Children from slum backgrounds are potential menaces to society.’ Neither the 10th nor the 4th Jurors makes reference to specific details of the defendant’s situation, but…

    • 853 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Jury and Angriest Juror

    • 899 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Juror #Eight Also insists that, “during the trial, too many questions were left unasked”. “He asks for the murder weapon to be brought in” and says that “it is possible that someone else stabbed the boy’s father…

    • 899 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

    12 Angry Men

    • 611 Words
    • 3 Pages

    1)Because he is the first to agree with juror number eight , deciding that there is not enough evidence to sentence the young boy to death.…

    • 611 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 1445 Words
    • 6 Pages

    He acted as the leader for the people who believed the defendant was guilty. He, like the Architect, is a natural born leader. He loudly argued his opinions about the case and refused to back down from his stance. Even in the end when he was completely out numbered he fought for his belief despite the persuasion of others. He couldn't care less what they thought of him. He was there to do his job and wouldn't be easily influenced by others.…

    • 1445 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Justice In 12 Angry Men

    • 666 Words
    • 3 Pages

    It’s the hottest day of the year in New York City, and 12 clammy men, who were put on a jury, are locked into a room, where the fan doesn’t work and the windows stick, to discuss the case of an 18 year old accused of murder. In the opening scene, the judge states that is it a first degree murder and if found guilty the teenager will receive the death penalty. The 18 year old is accused of killing his father with a “one of a kind” switch blade. The 12 jurors must decide if there is enough evidence to convict the teen of murder. When the initial vote is taken it is 11-1. The one vote for not guilty is juror eight, whose real name is Davis. He is a well-spoken man, wore a suit and tie and had his dark hair slicked back for the trial. Davis admits that he doesn’t know if the teen is innocent but says he could be. In the movie 12 Angry Men, Juror eight shows true justice…

    • 666 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 1063 Words
    • 5 Pages

    With eleven of his peers convinced of the accused’s guilt, Juror 8 faced the daunting task of not only persuading the jurors to move past their initial inclinations and prejudices, but also compelling them to deliberate the case in the full interest of justice. In doing so, the first piece of evidence he called into question was the murder weapon itself. According to the prosecution, the boy had bought it the night of the murder after being beaten repeatedly by his abusive father. They then claimed he had showed it off to some friends, headed back home to stab his father, and then finally returned a couple hours later to be arrested by the police. Also called into question was the testimony of the owner of the store from which the boy bought the knife. He not only attested to the fact…

    • 1063 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 1230 Words
    • 5 Pages

    juror’s assume he is guilty on the first vote. But luck for the boy is that the 8th juror who wants it to be a…

    • 1230 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Juror 10 is clearly motivated by his prejudice. He uses his intolerance to determine his vote for the accused defendant. For instance, in the beginning of Act I, Juror 10 haphazardly said, “ Look at the kind of people they are, you know them,” (13) without even digging deep into the case. It is quite obvious that Juror 10 is generating an “opinion” of the defendant based on the color of his skin and his background. He does not refer to them as regular people, but as “they” and “them” on certain pages. In the courtroom though, no juror is to have any judgments, they are supposed to bring the facts to the table, not their opinions. Juror 10’s outlook of the defendant is blinding him from thinking of any reasonable doubt. Further more, when Juror 10 said, “…I lived among em’ all my life, you can’t believe a word they say. You know that,” he yet again was referring to the defendant’s people as “em” and “they”. You can clearly infer that while Juror 10 was living amongst them, he must have experienced or witnessed situations which has caused him to have judgments on these specific people. These same judgments he brings to the courtroom just add difficulty into solving the case. Following Juror 10’s views further, when Juror 5 was explaining how the person who did stab the father was…

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Juror #3 came into this trial with a moral dilemma long before hearing the facts of the case. Given his past experiences, he would feel more inclined to vote guilty as to punish and make an example of this boy so that other kids would think twice. In this case if the jury decided on a guilty verdict, the defendant would be put to death. People might make rash decisions based…

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Juror 10 is one of the most racist and prejudice of the all the jurors a quote to show this is “Now you’re not going to tell us that we’re supposed to believe that kid, knowing what he is. Listen, I’ve lived among ‘em all my life. You can’t believe a word they say. I mean, they’re born liars.” When he says this he means/believes that people are born in slums are born to live lives of crime and disseat, even thou juror 5 was born and lived in a slum all his life he is a perfectly respectably man. This proves that juror 10 was wrong and people born in slums aren’t born to lie and commit crime. There for prejudice did obscure the truth for juror 10.…

    • 518 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Research Paper

    • 919 Words
    • 4 Pages

    His emotional prejudice gets in the way of his critically thinking through the evidence because he has emotional conflict with his own son. He is grouping all teens together because of his altercation with his son, and Juror 3 is just punishing the young man on trial because he cannot come to turns with his own failings as a parent with his child. Towards the end of the play Juror 3 is all alone on the vote count; he “looks around at all of them for a long time. They sit silently, waiting for him to speak, and all of them despise him for his stubbornness. Then, suddenly, his face contorts as if he is about to cry, and he slams his fist down on the table” … (thundering) All right” (30).…

    • 919 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Juror 12 keeps to himself and seems distracted and not interested. He plays noughts and crosses and draws sketches of his advertisements. Cannot articulate his reasoning and changes his vote on multiple occasions…

    • 1675 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays