Personal Insight In 12 Angry Men

Kesey shows us that the men are the victims in the scene with the men talking about fighting back. “He couldn’t continue in his hero role if he was sitting around the day room all the time in a shock stupor” (Kesey 291). This quote shows that the men are victims because the man was put into the EST machine because of some minor thing and after a while destroyed him and his brain. Elaborate more, look for clues in text. Another place where the men are obviously the victims is when the men are up getting examined for the flu season and they are talking about the EST machine and how they cant believe they put people in it for such minor things.

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.

Juror #2 finds it “interesting that he’d find a knife exactly like the one the boy bought”(24). Afterwards, the 8th Juror suggests that the old man, one of the witnesses, lied because of the point Juror #3 tried to make. Juror #3 says, that the old man “[ran ] to his door and [saw ] the kid tearing down the stairs fifteen seconds after the killing”(42). Juror #8 then suggests that the old man could not have done that because of his stroke.

Oedipus goes to a prophet to find out if he is adopted and who his real parents are, but learns about his curse instead. Frustrated and devastated, he leaves his adoptive parents whom he thinks are his real parents. On his journey, he bumps into an old man, who unbeknownst to him is his biological father. Describing the event, he says “The man out front and the old man himself began to crowd me off the road. The driver, who’s forcing me aside, I smash in anger.”

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.

Men in both The Crucible and in Twelve Angry Men were angry because of the situations placed upon them. Juror three’s bad relationship with his son was reminded to him during this case, angering him. Infuriated with the claims that Salem was impure, the court sought to eliminate anyone associated with it. Many convicted of witchcraft were either poor or of a minority group. Likewise, the boy was of a minority group, people who are viewed as inferior.

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.

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.

12 Angry Men:-Psychological Behaviour Analysis Signs Of attributions There were many examples of attribution errors and biases in the movie. For example (an actor observer bias) the kid (Victim) is known to have yelled "I'm going to kill you" on the night of the murder. Cobb says no one would threaten to kill anyone unless he mean it (internal attribution)(0:46:25)&(0:46:45) .But after some time Fonda involves cobb into some argument and indirectly makes him yell "I'll kill you".

Juror 11 switched to “Not Guilty” Juror 8 questioned the second point: The elderly man claim that he heard the father falling down the floor, and he ran to the door of his apartment and the elderly man saw the boy(Defendant) running away from the the crime scene apartment to his apartment in 15 seconds Jurors 5,6,8 also think that that the elderly man second claim is not possible physical because they all know that the witness has stroke diseases, so 15 seconds is not possible for his ability to walk around the apartment Juror 8 conclude that the elderly witness assume that the person was the defendant and the witness is not actually 100% sure that that male is the boy/defendants Juror 3” He’s got to burn!

We often pride our society for becoming more advanced and better. True, we now live in a place where medicine and technology is more advanced than that of what it used to be in the past. However, criminals still litter the world, possibly even more than it had previously. To cope, we have invented, a jury system, to help us separate the guilty from the not guilty. Twelve Angry Men provides such a story about the using of the jury.

Every American citizen should serve on a jury because it allows new ideas into the verdict and it is fair to all Americans. In Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose, Juror 11 says, “I have always thought a man was entitled to have unpopular opinion in this country. This is the reason why I came here. I wanted the right to disagree” (28). To allow all American citizens to serve on a jury, it would allow different views and ideas from other countries to be heard.