Things get heated between the men discussing the case which leads to juror number 3 saying “ Shut up, you son of a bitch! Let me go, God dammit ! I’ll kill him! I’ll kill him!” This makes it seem that juror three is driven by emotion and not by evidence which makes even more jurors question the verdict of guilty and find reasonable doubt. The next juror who is driven by prejudice and show much bigotry is juror number ten “ I’ll tell you something.
The evidence that is shown to prove this point is when all the jurors are all at the table and they all go to the window and turn their backs towards juror number ten, specifically juror numbers three and four. This happened while the vote was nine to three, nine voted innocent and three voted guilty. Three and four turned their backs towards number ten because they disagreed on why they thought the boy was guilty. Juror number ten was an ill-mannered man who was very bigot. He was bitter and didn’t value any human life except his own.
A man like this needs to be quote, to be listen to” (Juror 9). In this case juror 9 shows how sympathetic he can be and how convincing he can be. In the film Twelve Angry Men jurors 8 and 9 use cultural background , actions , and experiences witnesses and other jurors to persuade the other jurors to find the boy not guilty. Culture the values, beliefs norms and behaviors of certain groups of people plays a huge role in the film Twelve Angry Men. When juror number 8 tries to defend the accused boy saying that just because he grew up in the slums does not mean he is a murder.
It is not known if the boy is actually guilty or innocent, it will always remain hidden with the boy. It is about whether the jury has a reasonable doubt about his guilt, and this is how the whole debate started when the jury eight had a reasonable doubt about the whole incident of the boy killing his father and the witnesses. Juror eight who entered in the trial with an open mind finally managed to convince the others to do so. The movie illustrates that everything is not what it appears to be. The movie also reflects the prevailing sexism of America in the 1950’s.
Family The 3rd Juror mention how disrespectful was his kid, and how his kid even hit him once; some other members of the jury mention how this young boy was always getting hit by his father and they said that the situation was the motive of the murder. Juror number 3 was the last one in changing his vote not because he wasn’t sure, but he wants to punish this kid making a direct assimilation that this kid is like his and need to be punished. Characters: • 1st Juror: he acts as a foreman and he is responsible to maintain the order in the room and keep everyone else in track. This is not too hard for him because he is a football coach. • 2nd Juror: this actor doesn’t participate too much in the play, and he is shyer than the rest of the group.
When the juror’s expressed outrage, it was because they had heard something that they didn’t approve of therefore, they expressed an emotion that reflected their opinion. The juror’s emotions affected their belief by putting the boy onto the chair. Juror number 3 was convinced that the teenage boy was guilty. This was due to his past experiences within his family; the rage that he had towards his past created a very one-sided belief. Therefore, juror number 3 let his emotions choose the side he would be on.
As the play went on, Juror Eight started proving how the boy was innocent. In the end Juror Eight changed all the other juror’s minds, except for Juror Three’s. Juror Three ended up changing his vote, not because they changed his mind but because he gave into peer pressure. He still had his prejudice influenced decision, he only gave in because he didn't want it to be a hung jury. Another example, from the same play, is Juror Eight.
The jurors also argued that if the boy went back to go get the knife, he must be really motivated to hide the evidences of the crime even though there is a big chance of him getting caught. Many jurors have racial bias and a lot of stereotypes about kids that grew up in the slums and also who belong to certain racial groups/ethnicity. This stereotypes and racial slurs led to biased interpretations of the evidence. The jurors also led to conformation bias. For example, a lot of jurors expected that the boy was guilty.
These aspects have been revealed through three character who are Juror 10, Juror 8 and Juror 3. Juror Ten announces his intentions very early in the play. He speaks loudly and forcefully from the beginning, clearly showing his racism and prejudice towards the boy. Juror 10 quickly votes guilty and asserts that the defendant cannot be believed because “they’re born liars”. Additionally, he claims that the “kids who crawl outa those places are real trash.” With selfish attitudes like this, it was unlikely that Juror 10 would be interested in the truth behind the evidence and the case itself.