answer is none. It not only looks bad on the police department but shows faults within the justice system of Massachusetts and their failing to solve the case. To conclude it’s believable that Adnan Syed is in fact not guilty of the murder of Hae Min Lee but is being perceived as guilty by others who testify against him. To begin with the break up between Hae Min Lee and Adnan left somewhat of a bitter
Premium Murder Crime Criminal law
Organization in New Economy Assignment: Twelve Angry Men Movie The movie Twelve Angry Men is about the twelve jurors that could adjust their influence in a decision-making process for conviction an eighteen years-old boy‚ whether the boy guilty or not guilty in murdering of his father. It represents a perfect example for applicable of a work group development framework. It also has examples of influence techniques among a group’s members. This paper is looking at those specific examples in the
Premium Decision making Decision making software Decision theory
defendant not guilty. One may disagree with this statement because if the evidence that is presented in court is unclear‚ and then the jury grants the defendant not guilty and the defendant really did commit the crime then there is a criminal on the loose. For instance the OJ Simpson case when OJ tried on the glove and it did not fit. The jury saw that there was unclear evidence that proved him guilty and there was nothing that proved him not guilty but the jury still ruled not guilty even though he
Premium Jury
the decision to the jurors that they must decide if the kid is guilty or not. If the kid were to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt he will be sent to the electric chair. Fallowing in the film the jurors are sent to deliberate the fate of the kid. They enter the room in what was said to be the hottest day of the summer‚ but everyone is in laughter and ready to make their decision. At the first deliberation everyone votes guilty except for
Premium Decision making Jury Not proven
Men” reflects many social psychology theories. This tense‚ persuasive film features a group of jurors who must decide the guilt or innocence of an accused murder. Initially eleven of the twelve jurors vote guilty. Step by step‚ through heated discussion‚ the jurors are converted to a not-guilty decision. Upon examination‚ the film highlights social psychology theories in areas of agreement‚ attitude change and group process. Agreement within the context of the jury room conformity is a dangerous
Premium Jury Verdict
accused of murdering his father with a knife. The death sentence is mandatory if the boy is convicted and the verdict must be unanimous‚ either guilty or not guilty. The remainder of the movie is set in a hot‚ stuffy jury room. An initial vote is taken and the count is 11 guilty and 1 not guilty. As the vote is taken it is clear that some jurors are sure he is guilty and others seem to be going along with the majority. Most jurors seem to just want to deliver a verdict so they can leave. There is a level
Premium 12 Angry Men Jury Not proven
trial was against him‚ however‚ the twelve jurors had to make a verdict whether the boy is guilty or not guilty‚ and they decision would concluded whether the boy should or should not be sent to the electric chair. In process of making a verdict‚ the twelve jurors came together to reason and decide the fate of the boy. The verdict began with eleven guilty to one not guilty. Juror number 8‚ who voted not guilty did not believe on the evidence because‚ he believed that the murder weapon could be available
Premium Jury Not proven Verdict
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. Juror Three has a strong prejudice
Premium Jury Not proven Verdict
(p.34) which modified the votes of Juror Two and Six. Correspondingly‚ most jurors immediately started to rethink their votes as the evidence was slowly examined in depth. Allowing the evidence to digest and the vote count to change from “11 to 1- guilty” (p.7) to reach a verdict
Free Jury
has been accused of murdering his father and the jury has retired to determine his fate. The jury performs a preliminary vote and the results came out to be eleven for guilty and one‚ the architect played by Henry Fonda‚ for not-guilty. The rest of the jury then begins to persuade the architect that the accused is actually guilty. Each member of the jury played a key role in the development of the group and the task at hand. The foreman played a major task role and was almost like a manager of
Premium Trial Jury Henry Fonda