You work your heart out...", from these words we can see how angry and disappointed Juror #3 was towards his son. He was connecting negative memories of his son to the young suspect. So, the imagination of the young man who killed his father was absolutely intolerable to him. His disappointment and hatred for his son inadvertently made him certain that the child did killed his father. He allowed his own personal experiences to intrude into the judge which should be dispassionate and objective.
The jurors in Twelve Angry Men also had to deal with this problem. Juror number 3 had a son who have not talked to in years because he was so tough on him when he was younger. This juror had no trouble believing that the boy killed his father because he thinks his son could have killed him. Juror number 11 was an immigrant who believed in the American Justice system with all his heart. He wanted to make sure that the boy had a fair trial because he believed that was the American way, his experiences in his own country were very unfair to people of different races, religions and
Juror 10 is a closed minded older man. He uses a lot of stereotypes to make his decisions on whether or not the accused is really guilty or innocent. Juror 10 yells, “You said it there. I don't want any part of them, believe me” (12 Angry Men). At this point in the play he was using where the accused lived and grew up to influence his choice, he then quickly denied the fact that he is like that with everyone when one
Complete description of all “Fallacies” in the movie “12 ANGRY MEN”: The film “Twelve Angry Men” involves a lot of logical fallacies, some of which are quite prominent and provocative. Like for eg. The fallacies which involve racism and bigotry of Juror #10 and the anger revealed which manifests into personal anguish by Juror#3. The script introduces the viewers to the typical behavior and the state of mind of these jurors, who surprisingly turn out to be the last to change their opinions from “guilty” to “not guilty”. Juror#3 the frustrated father whose personal conflicts and experiences influence his view of the accused’s crime is very desperate to make it clear that his mind is already made up before the deliberations even start.
Their decisions are extremely biased initially either due to the background of the boy or what each of them holds as morally correct i.e. the sheer act in question of a boy killing his father is unthought-of no matter what the situation. One of the central characters in the movie is that of the Jury Foreman, played by Martin Balsam. His role is vital because he is responsible for guiding the whole discussion among the rest of the jurors and organizing an efficient system to ensure everyone’s point of view is taken into account. He comes across as authoritative on multiple occasions when he tries to silence any brewing arguments.
Johnny was continuously being assaulted by Socs looking for trouble and he would never fully recover from the trauma in which he has been through. He has been “jumped” by several Socs on his way to and from his home, without a purpose. In addition, Johnny has been beaten and left half-conscious, bruised, and cut up. Claim: In the book The Outsiders, Johnny Cade is entirely innocent of murder, as the Soc’s are trouble makers, and he acted out in defense of himself and a friend. Topic Sentence using PQA: The Socs are always causing trouble.
Family The 3rd Juror mention how disrespectful was his kid, and how his kid even hit him once; some other members of the jury mention how this young boy was always getting hit by his father and they said that the situation was the motive of the murder. Juror number 3 was the last one in changing his vote not because he wasn’t sure, but he wants to punish this kid making a direct assimilation that this kid is like his and need to be punished. Characters: • 1st Juror: he acts as a foreman and he is responsible to maintain the order in the room and keep everyone else in track. This is not too hard for him because he is a football coach. • 2nd Juror: this actor doesn’t participate too much in the play, and he is shyer than the rest of the group.
Okonkwo’s desire to be masculine in opposition to his father creates an internal conflict established in his fear of being thought weak, which ultimately leads to his death. Okonkwo devotes his life to becoming the opposite of his unsuccessful father. This need to become masculine introduces his fear: “But his whole life was dominated by fear, the fear of failure and weakness” (Achebe 13). Okonkwo is driven to be the contrary of his father, so he is determined to be an intrepid warrior. In Okonkwo’s eyes, his father was weak and unsuccessful because of his large debts.
Next Franek, the Foreman that who some mental problems , keeps attacking his Father for Elie’s gold crown . “ That presented Franek with the opportunity to torment him and , on a daily basis, to thrash him savagely…”( Page 55). This illustrates that with what Franek did to Elie’s Father , Elie is fearful what Franek can do. And if Elie does the wrong things to provoke Franek it could be fatal to his Father’s death. This causes Elie to question if his father worth it because if Elie save the gold crown, then he well have money if he does end up getting out.
This realisation, along with his pride and power is too much for him to overcome. One could argue that it is his inability to adapt which seals his fate. Okonkwo’s death, all due to his aggressive behaviour and inner struggle to avoid becoming like his father, is brutal. Since the beginning of the novel, I thought death would come to Okonkwo. However, I never imagined that the above characteristics would cause Okonkwo to seek death himself.