Juror number three the only member who believe that the young man was not getting a fair trial with that, during the initial round of voting cast a not guilty verdict. With the use of rounds and dyads he encouraged members to discuss the case clearly and objectively examining pieces of evidences used in court. Though other jurors were not his favor however, he remained adamant that the case be combed thoroughly. I believe that juror number eight personal characteristics and logical reasoning allowed him to bring the other members of the jury to his level and change their mindset, thinking and decision-making process ruling in favor of a unanimous 12-0 not guilty verdict. I believe that the members of the jury did work as team because there was a task and purpose to be accomplished.
I have a right,” and “A guilty man’s going to be walking on the streets. 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.
Through the play, ‘Twelve Angry Men’ established in 1957, the playwright, Reginald Rose signifies the importance of both rational attitude and emotions when making crucial decisions. Gathering on the “hottest day of the year” in a “large, drab, bare” jury room is throbbing for most jurors’ present. They have gathered to reach a ‘fair’ verdict and follow the judge’s instruction to “deliberate honestly and thoughtfully” as prejudice and experiences cloud their judgements. Whilst every juror has a different approach to the case, Rose demonstrates that both emotion and reason are used in the process of decision making. Taking decision without the interference of personal life leads one taking a fair judgement.
Guilty or not guilty, all citizens deserve a thorough trial to defend their rights. Formulating coherent stories from events and circumstances almost cost a young boy his life. In Twelve Angry Men, 1957, a single juror did his duty to save the life of an 18 year old boy by allowing his mind to rationalize the cohesive information presented by the court and its witnesses. The juror’s name was Mr. Davis, he was initially the only one of 12 jurors to vote not guilty in reason that the young boy, sentenced with first degree murder, may be innocent. I am arguing that system 1 negatively affects the jurors opinion on the case and makes it difficult for Mr. Davis to convince the other jurors of reasonable doubt.
The “Hero” of Twelve Angry Men All quotes and anything else taken from the story for this essay is from the play Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose. In the story of The Twelve Angry Men juror Eight can be known as the hero for the nine-teen year old boy. Just because he may have been the said hero of the boy, does not mean that the outcome was the right one. Yes, he was able to save a life by convincing the other members of the jury to not send this boy to be executed, but did he lead the the other members of the jury to the right decision. Juror Eight is the man who changes all the other juror's mind through reasonable doubt.
There is a similarity between the play of Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose and Trifles regarding the idea of investigating the evidences. Eleven men who are sure the murder is guilty have made up their minds before they have even considered that the killer
Helping others using his knowledge, and also listening to others when they need someone to talk to is what makes Slim a good person. Being there for people, such as Candy and George, is one of the very many good aspects of Slim. He is so quiet and reserved, but at the same time, his words speak louder than others. Additionally, throughout the story, Slim is the one person that the characters go to for advice in tough situations. For example,when Lennie smashed Curley’s hand, it was Slim who didn’t get both George and Lennie fired.
The movie “Twelve Angry Men” illustrates how twelve men are the jury reflecting a young man’s life who may or may not be the murder of his father. The main objective at aim is to reach a reasonable agreement by negotiation. The boy’s fate of being not guilty or guilty and being sentenced to death is in the hands of these men. Over the course of the jury’s deliberation, a number of differences take place. In the end, these assorted differences are negotiated and agreed upon.
Human nature and pride show when an individual has traits of humanity, and responsibility is other needed. Atticus didn't give up on his visions throughout the novel, and this is very important to the younger readers, because his character was a role model to many. "Then Mr. Underwood’s meaning became clear: Atticus had used every tool available to free men to save Tom Robinson, but in the secret courts of men’s hearts, Atticus had no case. Tom was a dead man the minute Mayella Ewell opened her mouth and screamed," (Lee 82). This quote explains that not many people believed in Atticus, but he believed in himself and his case, and that's what mattered in the long run.
What he gets from this is convincing the other jurors why he could be right. Henry Fonda has a theory y personality because he chose his own belief and didn`t care that he was the only juror from the start that believe the boy was innocent. Henry has a growth mindset because