Jackson October 28‚ 2010 12 Angry Men 5. There just seems to be a general lack of relevant background information in this case. There are only the two witnesses‚ and even their stories have some doubt surrounding them. Furthermore‚ none of the jurors (as far as we know) have any significant background in dealing with these matters. It is revealed that Ed Begley has a prejudice that seems to be affecting his judgment in the case. During an exchange with one of the other jurors‚ Begley says of the Hispanic
Premium Logic Fallacy Critical thinking
Juror #5 In the play‚ 12 Angry Men‚ there are 12 jurors in a jury room. All of them are completely different‚ coming from various occupations and backgrounds. Juror #5 stood out among them because of a few things. He was from a very different background than the others. He grew up in the slums‚ just like the teenager being tried in the case. Because of this‚ he would take offense to the rude things the other jurors said about people from the slums. This contributed a lot to him changing his
Free Jury Not proven Trial
Case Study 12 Angry Men PROC 5840 Negotiations KaShawna M. Davis Brief list of the major case issues that are instrumental in deciding the jury conclusion. Below I have defined the major case issues that are instrumental in deciding the jury: The defendant left his house at 8:00 P.M. after being “punched” several times by his father. The defendant went to a neighborhood “junk shop” and bought a switchblade knife with a “very unusual carved handle and blade.” The defendant met some friends
Premium Negotiation Jury
movie‚ Twelve Angry Men‚ had the same themes. They both showed how important is is to be openminded and to find new perspectives. The main message was to follow your heart and be true to your own opinion. Establish Evidence: In the beginning‚ a few juror’s were silent and weren’t willing to share their opinions. They were following the men who seemed to have the most power even though they weren’t necessarily right. Evidence: Juror 11‚ for example‚ didn’t have much of a role in the beginning but by the
Premium Morality Crime Law
12 Angry Men Analysis The movie 12 Angry Men is a very abstract movie. It gets the audience thinking about the clues and the fact of the matter which is if the boy is actually guilty. This movie shows many of the concepts that are talked about in our book and in our class. The movie is about an 18 year old boy whose mother has died when he was 9. He has lived in many orphanages and has a juvenile record. His father has been in and out of jail for many things‚ and on one night that the boy
Premium Jury Verdict
whole jury votes guilty but one‚ Henry Fonda‚ or juror eight‚ and so the jury is forced to talk it out and make a decision. The other eleven jurors aren’t caring enough to sit out and talk it out‚ Henry Fonda tries to get as much evidence as he can to persuade the jurors that there is a possibility that the boy is guilty. Slowing he convinces them‚ one by one. While we are unsure whether he is right or wrong‚ 8th Juror is one of the only jurors who is unaffected by any kind of negative bigotries
Premium Jury Not proven Academy Award for Best Actor
TWELVE ANGRY MEN – QUOTES P1. ‘It now becomes your duty to separate the facts from the fancy’. (Judge) ‘I urge you to deliberate honestly and thoughtfully’. (Judge) ‘If‚ however‚ there is no reasonable doubt –then you must‚ in good conscience‚ find the accused guilty’. (Judge) ‘Your verdict must be unanimous’. (Judge) P3. ‘..Even when the case is as obvious as this one. I mean‚ did you ever hear so much talk about nothing?’ (Juror 3) ‘Everybody deserves a fair trial. Sometimes I think we’d
Premium Jury Law Not proven
of building after fight * Witness heard boy yell “I’m going to kill you” at 12:10 A.M. * Witness heard body fall a second later * Witness saw boy run down stairs and out of building * Witness from across street‚ 60 feet away‚ divided by an “L” line‚ saw boy stab his father in a downward motion through her bedroom window‚ looking through the windows of the last two cars of a passing 6 car “L” train at 12:10 AM * Nobody saw the boy going to or coming out of movie theater * The
Premium KILL Man Academy Award for Best Actor
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
Premium Jury Not proven 12 Angry Men
“12 Angry Men” In the Film “12 Angry Men” Aristotelian rhetoric was used by the jury members to make a case for the accused. The eighth juror was the one to shed light on this case. He did so by using two of the three rhetoric styles. Juror eight used Pathos to convince one other jury member by stating that just because he grew up in the slums doesn’t mean the accused did it. He gained the sympathy of the jury member who had come from the same background and made something of himself. The same
Premium Jury Not proven Trial