instructions to the jury. The twelve men must determine‚ unanimously‚ whether the accused is innocent or guilty of the charge of murder. These twelve then move to the jury room‚ where they begin to become acquainted with the personalities of their peers. Throughout their deliberation‚ not a single juror knows another by his name. In a preliminary vote they are startled to find that one juror has voted "not guilty." Many of the jurors are amazed and disturbed because Juror #8 (played by Fonda)‚ the lone
Free Jury Not proven Logic
12 Angry Men Assignment In group settings‚ people will often comply with the opinions of other group members regardless of personal beliefs‚ and are not likely to voice their true opinion unless someone else does before them. This statement reflects social influence‚ which is described as interpersonal processes that change members’ thoughts‚ feelings‚ and behaviors. Social influence plays a huge role in the film that we watched‚ and explains much of what went on amongst the 12 jury men. This
Premium Social psychology Voting Psychology
Hum115 12 Angry Men The character in this movie that was the most effective critical thinker was juror 8(Henry Fonda). The types of characteristics that Fonda‚ exemplify is provisionalism‚ creativity‚ and critical thinking. By doing this he is uncover new ways of interpreting evidence‚ turns to certainty and shortsightedness when arriving at conclusions. For example‚ Fonda commented on how the boy had been slapped around all his life and was treated poorly. This kind of thinking leads to more external
Premium Critical thinking
Jeffery Small 11/9/11 Ms. Stephens 310 12 Angry Men Essay In the book “12 Angry Men” by Reginald Rose‚ a verdict of not guilty was given to the boy after the fact that apparently all the jurors except one thought that the boy was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. All of the key evidence presented in the court was rejected by the jury‚ which led the jurors to have a reasonable doubt about the boy’s guiltiness. This evidence in the book will go by chronological order and support
Premium Jury Not proven Epistemology
The film “12 Angry Men” is a 1957 drama consisting of a dozen men on jury‚ who attempt to reach a verdict involving a teenager in a murder case. A guilty verdict was initially predicted‚ but the jury members start questioning and reasoning the testimonies given in court. Was the boy being accused of stabbing his father really guilty? All the information regarding the timing of the train‚ the timing of the murder‚ and the testimonies did not add up. Through much debate‚ a complex voting process‚ and
Premium Jury Verdict Not proven
A Synopsis of 12 Angry Men One of the top one hundred movies of all time according to the American Film Institute (number 87 to be exact)‚ and also listed as one of his "Great Movies" by Rogert Ebert‚ 12 Angry Men is considered a household classic today and the definition of a quality movie. Unlike many of the movies today‚ 12 Angry Men doesn’t use vulgar language‚ have raunchy sex scenes‚ or any type of real violence through out the movie‚ but yet it is still considered a classic. In this paper
Premium Jury 12 Angry Men Henry Fonda
audience and include different opinions into a shared conclusion. In the movie “12 Angry Men”‚ juror number 8 (Henry Fonda) was not sure if evidence presented against a young defendant in court left reasonable doubt for a guilty conviction. The other jurors believed the presented facts and the defendant’s background warrants a guilty conviction. The movie showed how juror number 8 persuasively got the other jurors to review each fact logically‚ which led to an unanimous not guilty decision. Conger
Premium Regulatory Focus Theory Persuasion Logic
Who Had To Use Thinking Skills In Twelve Angry Men‚ a young man is on trial for stabbing and killing his father. The movie focuses on twelve randomly selected citizens who are assigned the duty of determining the fate of this 19 year old man. The jury is supposed to examine certain facts and determine the truth based solely on the evidence presented to them in court. It is assumed that the jurors will judge fairly and without personal bias. Basically‚ the jurors need to use critical thinking during
Premium Critical thinking Thought
Moral Foundations 12 Angry Men and Morality A moral person does what is right for the group or society as a whole‚ not what is just right for themselves or one other person at any given point in time. In 12 Angry Men the voice of moral reason is clearly Juror Number 8‚ who from the beginning is the only “Not Guilty” vote because he believes they should at least talk about the court case of the Puerto Rican boy before they send him ultimately to his death. Juror 8 had integrity; he realized
Premium Jury Evidence Law
Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose is a play about a jury consisting of twelve men trying to decide whether a boy accused of murder is guilty or innocent. Each juror has their own past experiences‚ each with their own influence. However‚ some jurors bring up their pasts during the case. That is because a man’s experiences have a profound effect on the way he thinks and acts. Beneficial or not‚ Jurors Three and Eleven’s pasts affect not only the way they act‚ but the way the rest of the jurors act
Premium Jury Not proven Court