Fallacies are wrong or false beliefs that have little to no basis or evidence. The first use of this is when one of jurors says that all kids are liars and anything that kids say cannot not be trusted. There are many kids who are not liars. There are many children who do tell the truth and can
We have the coincidence that the man was murdered just when the train was passing. Due to the proximity of the house and the noise the train emits the old man could not hear anyone scream. The man also argues that fifteen seconds after hearing those words and watching the father's body fall he watched the young man running down the hall. With the help of the building's plans the jury number eight showed that it was impossible for the man to see the young man running down the hallway only 15 seconds after hearing the scream according to the distance between him and the hall. Another piece of evidence is a woman who swears to have seen the young man stabbed the father through the last two windows of the train.
Even a blatant, “I’ll kill you!” supposedly exclaimed by the boy towards his father was enough for the him to make his decision. This man was shown to be short tempered throughout the play. As more jurors began taking into account the evidence and proving the accused innocence, juror 3 became louder and far more boisterous. He wouldn’t even let the summer heat halt his anger, anger which soon consumed him and brought out the hypocrisy of his claim by hissing through his teeth to another juror, “Let me go. I’ll kill him.
Juror #2 finds it “interesting that he’d find a knife exactly like the one the boy bought”(24). Afterwards, the 8th Juror suggests that the old man, one of the witnesses, lied because of the point Juror #3 tried to make. Juror #3 says, that the old man “[ran ] to his door and [saw ] the kid tearing down the stairs fifteen seconds after the killing”(42). Juror #8 then suggests that the old man could not have done that because of his stroke. He then decides to recreate what the old man said he did on the night on the murder.
12.” (12 Angry Men). He thinks the only pieces of evidence are the witnesses because they said they saw the killing even though there was flaws within their testimony. After further investigation, he agrees the boy is not guilty. Then, juror number three persuades number twelve
The Power of Three Perspectives One can be easily mislead or persuade in a direction they do not agree with. However this is not the case with Juror 8 (Mr. Davis) in the film 12 Angry Men. In this film, twelve jurors try to identify whether or not the convicted eighteen year-old boy is guilty of murdering his father with a switchblade knife. If the puerto-rican boy is found guilty, he will be sent to the electric chair and sentenced to death. The movie begins in the humid jury room by taking a vote to see whether or not the boy is guilty: eleven guilties and one not guilty.
The play states, “No. 8 remains standing, holding the scrap of paper. He looks at it closely now and seems to be interested in it.” We can see that number eight was trying his best to find clues and arguments to prove to the rest of the jury that he has a reason to believe the boy is innocent. He stays and investigates well the evidence against him and finds all these scenarios that don’t add up to what has said happened. Until slowly everyone comes to their senses and changes their vote guilty, to not guilty.
Juror 11 switched to “Not Guilty” Juror 8 questioned the second point: The elderly man claim that he heard the father falling down the floor, and he ran to the door of his apartment and the elderly man saw the boy(Defendant) running away from the the crime scene apartment to his apartment in 15 seconds Jurors 5,6,8 also think that that the elderly man second claim is not possible physical because they all know that the witness has stroke diseases, so 15 seconds is not possible for his ability to walk around the apartment Juror 8 conclude that the elderly witness assume that the person was the defendant and the witness is not actually 100% sure that that male is the boy/defendants Juror 3” He’s got to burn! He’s slipping through our fingers!” Juror 8 told Juror 3 that he wants the boy to die because of his own desire rather than the actual
He has no sympathy and only cares about the evidence of the case. On the website Study.com i found “When Juror Eight feels sorry for the teenage defendant, who is accused of murdering his father, because of the bad lot this boy got in life, Juror Four starts fixing his hair as he is uninterested in anything except evidence. He then says, 'We 're not here to go into the reasons why slums are breeding grounds for criminals; they are. I know it. So do you.