12 Angry Men Murder Scene Analysis

A murderer!! He’s got to die! Stay with me!” Those sentences are said before the final vote, which is eleven vote not guilty, and one votes guilty after they test all evidence. Those sentences also show that Juror Three is very emotional because the boy makes him remember the bad relationship between his kid and him.

He was arrested the 21st of April in 2003 and is still on death row till this day. Evidence revealed during the case, Scott Peterson is a coward and was rightfully sentenced the death penalty for his wrong doings. Scott was arrested he was convicted of a double homicide and murder without bail. The trial started and they chose six men and six women to be the jury. When the parents found out of these charges they decided to sue him so he couldn’t sell his story for money.

12 angry men Have you ever given a opinion and made your final decision without evidence to prove if your right or wrong? Victims could be innocent in a case and be spending time in prison for something that they didn’t do. Evidence can show specific details on a case and change people’s mind about the victim. It’s easy for people to make up their minds about any situation and immediately assume someone who was there with him or her.

The conflict that is shown most in the book is Christopher’s listening skills from the start of the book to the end. In the beginning, when Chris finds Wellington deceased, he acts as if he is a detective. He circles around the neighborhood asking anyone he can find. Annoyed, Chris’s dad tells him numerous times to stop investigating the murder. With the disapproval of his father, Chris continues to search for the murderer, determined to put this person away.

Davis, the first juror to vote not guilty, ignored his emotional attachment to the first-degree murder case and thought purely around the evidence the boy and the witnesses provided to the court. The other jurors said, “eleven men and you think he’s guilty, nobody has to think about it twice except you.” They said this in accordance to system 1 and original response to the stories told in the court. Otherwise, not once did Mr. Davis refer to system 1 through laziness. Mr. Davis spent the entirety of that hot day in a room with eleven other men, spending every second he had on convincing them of the potential error that could have been made in convicting the young boy.

In order to receive a conviction, the lawyer must prove that the accused party had some intention or willingness to end the life of another person. On the other hand, if evidence shows the death to be accidental and unavoidable,

Now, although he may be better remembered as the leader of the lynch mob who wanted to kill Tom Robinson, we see a truly remarkable side to him as well when he serves on the jury for the Ewell vs. Robinson case. Atticus describes it as the following: “You might like to know that there was one fellow who took considerable wearing down - in the beginning he [Mr. Cunningham] was rarin’ for outright acquittal.” [Page 222] As this quote models, Mr. Cunningham stepped up and really made the jury rethink.

In 12 Angry Men, the author creates a very long and challenging process for the jurors to decide on an unanimous verdict. At the beginning of the play, Juror Eight is the only one that votes for not guilty. Because he does not know what he thinks, he asks that they review all the facts and testimonies. When Juror Eight

12 Angry Men Jury Attitude Development The Juror's attitudes in “Twelve Angry Men” changes from Act one to Act three by caring more about the outcome of the case and less about going home. In the beginning, all of the jurors, save but one, Juror eight, voted guilty without ever caring about if the evidence presented was factual. Peer pressure seemed to be a large portion of this, seeing that a few of the jurors raised their hands hesitantly when asked to publicly vote for guilty. Juror seven voiced how he felt about this case, saying that the decision “better be [made] fast,” simply because he “got tickets to the Seven Year Itch.”

He saw when his father was at a shooting range, then some time later he is being accused of murder, well okay then. Maybe this proves that everybody is not as much of a thinker as they should at twelve years old, context clues. Even the jury of the trial for the case were darn right stupid. The judge even knew the Zak father murdered the Rabbi, he was applauded by their decision on the crime he committed.

12 Angry Men, begins with the scene of a courtroom where the decision of a murder trial was being taken. In the case, the son was accused of killing his father and that was what was asked by the Jury of the 12 men to deliberate upon. All of them had to come to one single decision and give the verdict, i.e. every member should be having the same opinion in the end. They had to prove whether the boy was guilty or not guilty of murder.

To make the verdict of Seton guilty for a murder that wasn’t fully proven. Seton was sent to be hanged. As a jury member, Mr. Wargrave should be found innocent, there is no evidence of him physically murdering or convincing the victim to kill himself, he was just a judge doing his job and sending a criminal

Another proven false confession, Wayne and Sharmon Stock were found shot to death in an upstairs bedroom in April 17, 2006. Police had no leads, so they focused the investigation toward the family. More than a few family member suggested that Matthew Livers a 29 year-old, had a tough relationship with his Uncle Wayne and wasn’t much liked by his Aunt Sharmon. Authorities also connected Livers cousin Nicholas Sampson a 28 year-old with first-degree murder. During Livers interrogation by investigators from the Cass County Sheriff’s Office and Nebraska State Patrol for nearly 11 hour without a lawyer, put a lot of pressure towards Matthew to give the detective what they wanted.

With over 30 victims killed, Ted took his time with his murders. Some even believe there are bodies that are yet to be found. Ted underwent many different identities in order to lure his victims. When Ted decided to represent himself in his trials, he wanted to lay down a fabricated story that would have persuaded the jurors to see why Ted should be dropped of the charges. As much as Ted tried, the jurors did not believe his stories, and he was found guilty.

Twelve Angry Men was about a group of jurors struggle to come with a verdict for a murder case. In the beginning, all but one tenacious juror believed that the eighteen year old boy was guilty of murdering his father. The main problem of the story was that the jurors verdict had to be unanimous. Through the process of trying to get each other to change positions, the jurors face many arguments and disagreements. The jurors personalities clash multiple times because each one has a different view on things and are adamant in their decisions.