The third juror begins to become irritated when the other members want to review the evidence. A negative quality about this man is that he acts on emotions, not common sense. He’s the first to vote guilty and last to change his vote to not guilty. He claims that he hasn’t seen his son in two years, so he wants to take his loneliness and anger out on the defendant. His motive is to be the man, who pulls the kill switch on the electric chair.
The American jury system is know throughout the country and with its reputation, it’s incorrect. Reginald Rose proved a great stand on the jury with his play, Twelve Angry Men, as this shows the flaws and adept qualities in the jury room. Throughout the play the jury is debating whether or not the defendant is guilty of murdering his father. The jury began at eleven guilty and one not guilty to at the very end all not guilty. The play shows all the possibilities that happen in a jury room.
The film, 12 angry men is about 12 members of the jury that is trying to solve a trial of a murder. There is a juror named, Henry Fonda. Throughout the argument the jurors were really biased. There were many attributions in the film. One of it is when Henry Fonda made the point when the boy got pushed around all his life and he was treated really poorly.
"Don 't judge a book by its cover" is a famous saying that some of us heard it before and some of us experienced it. 12 jurors were experiencing this quote when they gathered to decide whether a young boy is guilty by killing his father or not. Juror 2 stated, "Well, anyway, I think he was guilty" (6). Juror 2 represent most of us, as sometimes we judge from what we hear and not from what we see. The 12 jurors are from various backgrounds and each one has a distinctive personality.
In his play Twelve Angry Men, Reginald Rose brings us back in time to 1957, to a jury room of a New York Court of Law where one man, Juror #8, confronts the rest of the jury to look at a homicide case without prejudice, and ultimately convinces Juror #2, a very soft-spoken man who at first had little say in the deliberation. Throughout the play, many of the jurors give convincing arguments that make one think about whether the boy is “guilty” or “not guilty.” Ultimately, one is convinced by ethos, logos, and pathos. We can see ethos, logos, and pathos having an effect on Juror #2 as he begins as a humble man and changes into someone brave at the end. Although all three modes play a part in convincing Juror #2, pathos was the most influential
In Twelve Angry Men, the award winning three act drama written by Reginald Rose, each juror is told to reconsider a reasonable doubt in deciding the fate of a young man accused of murdering his own father. With little exception, each juror bring his own personal biases and preconceptions. However, in this rollercoaster of a drama, no other juror stands out as much as Juror Three. Though other jurors may occasionally admit a reasonable doubt, Juror Three is strictly motivated by his superiority complex, impatience, and personal grudges. Juror Three often believes his opinions matter more than others and only appreciates those who agree with him.
The boy should deserve a careful discussion from jurors before face the result of the trial and he emphases that there were only two people who saw the whole process of the murder stabbing the boy’s dad Juror 8 questioned the weapon which claim to kill father, which is a normal switchblade that even juror 8 owns one himself Juror 8 told other jurors to revote, and if this time 11 jurors still think that the boy is guilty, then he will go with them and say that the boy is guilty too One person voted “Not Guilty” at the second
The novel Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose includes conflicts on a jury duty of twelve white men with very different backgrounds and experiences. In order for someone to be convicted the jury must unanimously reach a guilty verdict. There must be enough evidence against the defendant to prove he is guilty beyond reasonable doubt This is just one of many examples that shows how even the slightest hesitation can make an enormous change on the upshot in many different environments in both court and life. Therefore; doubt is the most powerful asset in the play. Doubt slowly creeps itself into the minds of the jurors, slowly growing stronger and stronger as more of them begin to doubt the boy’s innocence.
12 Angry Men Essay The movie 12 Angry Men, is about a son who may have committed murder, killing his father, and 12 jurors have to either prove him innocent or guilty. There are jurors who are fixed on saying that the 19 year old boy is guilty of murdering his father, but there are other jurors who are saying he is innocent until they have proof to say that he is guilty. There are many instances when the jurors use fallacies, deductive reasoning, and inductive reasoning when they are trying to prove either that the boy is guilty or innocent. Fallacies are used throughout the movie, but when the debate started, there are more uses of fallacies than towards the end, when the argument is almost developed. Fallacies are wrong or false beliefs that have little to no basis or evidence.
In addition to these juvenile inmates, Mark Salzman, their teacher, also wears a mask. Mark, who doesn’t like teenagers and gangsters, is very nervous when he visits Duane’s writing class. He knows the juveniles in this class have all been charged with murder. Mark says, “I didn’t want to challenge anyone, so I struggled to keep my gaze from meeting any of theirs” (18). Mark puts on a mask of courage so that the juvenile inmates don’t become aware that he is nervous and scared like the Cowardly Lion in the Wizard of Oz.