The knife that was used to kill the father was said to be “one-of-a-kind”. Mr. Davis who believes the boy isn’t guilty, pulls out a similar knife after the other jurors try to convince him that the boy was guilty because the knife was unique and there wasn’t another knife like that anywhere. The tenth juror is a bigot man who attacks right away and doesn’t change his mind about what he thinks. In the beginning he describes the boy as “one of them”. In "12 Angry Men" as an Integrative Review of Social Psychology Carrie Fried states that, “The movie allows students to examine how situational forces can affect the behavior of individuals even though the individuals have strong and diverse personalities.
All things considered, if the verdict came back guilty the nineteen-year-old man would be sentenced to death by the electric chair. Without delay, the jurors came to their decision and eleven of the twelve jurors voted guilty, but to be able to prosecute the nineteen-year-old man, the jurors needed to be concordant with each other. Nevertheless, the jurors went to a discrete room to discuss whether the nineteen-year-old man was guilty or not. In act II of Twelve Angry Men, Juror #8 discussed with the rest of the jurors as to why he believed that the man was not guilty in his eyes. With the more corroboration that Juror #8 gave, the more jurors began to believe that the man might not be guilty but instead innocent.
As the movie went on, all the jurors had explained why they had a bad view on children from the slums. Juror number three is the one who is always thinking the worst of the boys from the slums. In the end of the movie he has a picture of a boy, his son, who is from the slums and makes him upset so he is trying to take out his anger toward his own boy on the boy on trial. All the other jurors except number eight, have a bad view of the slums because of the prominence of crime in the areas of the slums and they don 't see all the kids from the slums because they just see the bad kids that come from the areas. The jurors may not know all the children from this area so they will have a lack of knowledge.
The main character is busy barricading the house to make it safer, Mr. Cooper is in the basement waiting for Ben to do all the work and take all the risks, much like slave owners did many years ago. Correspondingly, throughout the movie Ben is betrayed and held back by the white people around him, just as the African Americans have been for many years. The ending of this film is graphic and symbolic, as it shows the African American character being murdered and treated like something other than human, he is shot, but there are no repercussions for the shooter, instead he is praised by the sheriff. After Ben is shot the hunting party is shown sinking their meat hooks into him to bring Ben’s body to the fire to be burned. Meat hooks are used by butchers not only to move meat, but to hang it as well.
People like juror number 8 , but also people like juror number 3, 4 and 10 who firmly say that he is guilty. Juror number 10 is not able to look at the situation objectively. This film very slowly reveals to us that he is racist. Early on he drops small and subtle remarks that
12 Angry Men The play is set in a New York City Court of Law jury room in 1957. We discover this is a murder case and that, if discovered blameworthy, the compulsory sentence for the charged is capital punishment. After these guidelines, the members of the jury enter. Every one of the legal hearers assume the conspicuous blame of the litigant, whom we learn has been blamed for slaughtering his dad. The twelve take a seat and a vote is taken.
The jury must reach its verdict by considering only the evidence introduced in court and the directions of the judge.” Functions and duties of a juror. The movie twelve angry men set the scene of a typical murder trial of a young man who supposedly murdered his father. Jurors are selected from various backgrounds, cultures and professions. Twelve angry men showed the diversity of people ranging from bankers, poker player, parent and those raised in the not so sophisticated lifestyle of the ghettos. Those men were bestowed the opportunity to deliberate on the fate of this eighteen-year-old man.
TWELVE ANGRY MEN In shape, "12 Angry Men" is a court dramatization. In object, it 's a brief training in those entries of the Constitution that guarantee litigants a reasonable trial and the assumption of blamelessness. It has a sort of stark straightforwardness: Other than a brief setup and epilog, the whole film happens inside of a little New York City juror room, on "the most smoking day of the year," as twelve men discuss the destiny of a youthful respondent accused of killing his dad. In the film, there is a hypothesis around why the litigant couldn 't recollect the name of the motion picture he had seen driving the members of the juror to accept that the kid had lied about heading off to the motion pictures. On the other hand, getting
In the movie 12 Angry Men, the jurors are set in a hot jury room and they are trying to determine the verdict of a young man who is accused of committing a murder. The jurors all explain why they think the accused is guilty or not guilty. As they are debating back and forth, the reader begins to realize that each juror brings their own judgement of the world and their own biases. The viewer can see that the jurors have their own distinguishable personalities, but all of their personalities intertwine with each other to create a perfect character balance for a great movie. Juror 10 is a closed minded older man.
Story Line 12 men meet at a Jury Room after a trial to decide if a 16 year old man is guilty of killing his father if the man is found guilty the sentence is Death Penalty, this was supposed to be an easy decision, but turn around when one of the members of the Jury was not agree and bought in question the witnesses and what they saw or heard versus what they should. The majority of the members were against Jury number 8, but when he was presenting more remarkable and questionable proves to the case one by one started changing their mind. At the end all the members where agree that was not enough proves to convict this young man to death. Overview of the Film Themes: Justice 12 men are responsible to decide if a young man is guilty of killing