In act one of Twelve Angry Men, Juror Seven is a loud and flashy man who has more important things to do than to sit on a jury. Especially he says, “Right. This better be fast. I’ve got tickets to (pg. 13).” The word “fast” shows that he wants to get out the room as soon as possible.
People act upon what they think. Within “12 Angry Men”, all of the jurors have an opinion but some voice their more than others. One juror in particular, Juror Ten, voices his opinion about the boy in question. Repeatedly throughout the play, Juror Ten makes many thoughtless and hurtful comments about a certain kind of people. It is clear that Juror Ten’s uncompromising belief that the accused is guilty is because of his dislike for the boy’s race.
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.
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.”
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 might be innocent. But, Juror eight gets them to review the evidence more carefully. As a group, the judges developed visions that even most jurors changed their views when the validity of the evidence was shown to be a questionable. There is a similarity between the play of Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose and Trifles regarding the idea of investigating the evidences.
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.
Antony 's speech is contrary to Brutus 's because he deals with the peoples emotions during his entire speech. He says that the thing that killed Caesar was not that he got stabbed but it was because his heart blew up when he seen that his best friend Brutus betrayed him and killed him. Antony talked about how Brutus said that Caesar was very ambitious yet Antony offered him a crown 3 times yet every time he turned it down. Caesar had a lot of integrity. That behavior didn’t seem very ambitious.
He also taunts the crowd with Cæsar’s will, warning them that it will “inflame [them], it will make [them] mad:”(Shakespeare III.ii.148). When the crowd gathers around him, rather than directly read the will, Antony tells of the death of Cæsar, appealing to their emotions so they wish to rebel, but before they leave, the shrewd speaker reminds them, “You have forgot the will I told you of,”(Shakespeare III.ii.239). The Romans go into a total frenzy after the declaration of the will, and they are swayed so much into anger that they kill a poet named Cinna only because he shares the name of one of the conspirators. Danson illustrates that “The poet’s rendering at the hands of the mob is unreasonable, based solely on the confusion of identities (of names, words), and while it bears some resemblance to the sacrifice of a scapegoat figure, it is really no sacrifice at all but unsanctioned murder,”(Danson 226), which is completely ignored by the entire city, for their emotions won over their reason and Antony is too busy making his list of threats to his
Twelve Angry Men (1.) In this film I really enjoyed how the characters always stood up and walked around as well as having a scene in a bathroom instead of twelve angry men sitting around a table for the whole film. I also like when watching the beginning of the movie how I though the person was guilty and every time someone brought up a point it made me doubt myself and make me feel like I’m in the jury and the movie as well. Also I liked how each person’s character was given enough of their own personality instead of two main characters arguing and the rest of the people are just followers. If I could change one thing about the movie I would add a couple more dramatic pauses to let the viewer of the film create his own opinion and choose a side without having to constantly absorb new information and being a bit indecisive.
This is worse than Roman circus gladiatorial contests! Why do men revert to this primal reptilian brain actions are very hard for me to understand? Starting with the gangs. But maybe I should re-read Golding 's Lord of the Flies".
Through out the two films, Juror 3 and Abigail Williams are both motivated my their own personal desires and dislikes. Both of them go about the film similarly, making threats towards the other characters. We hear Juror 3 tell Juror 8 he will kill him in a fit of rage, without any real intention behind his words. This is meant to intimate Juror 8 however only succeeds in making Juror 3 look foolish. Whilst Juror 3 's threats are empty, Abigail 's are not.
I think the whole lesson of this book was that violence was bad because every time someone fought it ended really badly. This book showed that even though violence seems easy and, you can easily sort things out with a fight it will come with worse consequences. The greasers always fought, and the Socs always jumped but in the end we saw how both of these resulted in two deaths, and a bad fire. In the end both the socs and greasers both realized that fighting was bad, and throughout the book we see ponyboy question why he fights. Johnny is proof that we shouldn’t fight because earlier in the book we learn that he was jumped by Socs, and since then he was always different.
The fiber evidence presented in this case was so overwhelming and simply was the driving force leading to Wayne Williams conviction. I do not believe the prosecution would have been able to obtain the same results without it. The credibility of the FBI forensics investigators and their reputable crime lab made for excellent testimony concerning the fiber evidence at trail, which the defense was simply ill prepared to counter attack its merits (The Atlanta, n.d.). Other evidence was presented in this case, and much of this evidence while certainly impactful on the case and to members of the jury, this evidence alone without the fiber evidence would surely not have held up to the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt.
Power is when the fate of events and/or individuals are in the control of one person or group. Arthur Miller’s play The Crucible reflects the many different sides of power, the power over self, the power over others, and the power over all. Miller’s play takes place in one of America’s most frightening times, the Salem Witch Trials, where a Puritan community went on a mad witch hunt through their town. Many innocent people were accused, and once accused, they could either deny and hang or confess to witchcraft and accuse others. One of Miller’s most powerful individuals is his antagonist Abigail.