Davis, the first juror to vote not guilty, ignored his emotional attachment to the first-degree murder case and thought purely around the evidence the boy and the witnesses provided to the court. The other jurors said, “eleven men and you think he’s guilty, nobody has to think about it twice except you.” They said this in accordance to system 1 and original response to the stories told in the court. Otherwise, not once did Mr. Davis refer to system 1 through laziness. Mr. Davis spent the entirety of that hot day in a room with eleven other men, spending every second he had on convincing them of the potential error that could have been made in convicting the young boy.
He pays more attention on the show that he wants watch than the case. Also, in his mind, he expects that everyone has the same thought as he because he thinks this case is easy based on the proven evidence and testimonies. On another hand, “fast” also shows that Juror Seven does not care about if the boy is guilty. He only cares about himself and his time, and he does not think logically before he votes. Also, when twelve jurors discuss the facts, Juror Seven brings up something.
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.
12 Angry Men Henry Fonda the eighth juror paradigm is the belief that the 18-year-old is innocent because how the evidence doesn’t seem clear to him. At the start of the trial all of the jurors, but him believes the boy killed his father. His paradigm is positive because he believes the boy has done nothing wrong and he pulls theories on why the boy could be innocent. What Henry paradigm creates is how the old man and woman are witnesses that made false accusations. What he gets from this is convincing the other jurors why he could be right.
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.
12 angry men Have you ever given a opinion and made your final decision without evidence to prove if your right or wrong? Victims could be innocent in a case and be spending time in prison for something that they didn’t do. Evidence can show specific details on a case and change people’s mind about the victim. It’s easy for people to make up their minds about any situation and immediately assume someone who was there with him or her.
This shows a moment Atticus took to explain to Scout the importance of realizing that arguments can not get in the way of your friends and home. Another example of Atticus exemplifying his morality, is when he explained racial differences to Scout. “As you grow older, you’ll see white men cheat black men every day of your life, but let me tell you something and don’t you forget it—whenever a white man does that to a black man, no matter who he is, how rich he is, or how fine a family he comes from, that white man is trash” (Lee, 220). This quote demonstrates another example of Atticus passing his values down to his kids. In the end, Atticus wants his kids to grow up with good morals with them treating people fairly and with
¨Gentleman, a court is no better than each man of you sitting before me on this jury. A court is only as sound as its jury, and a jury is only as sound as the men who make it up. I am confident that you gentlemen will review without passion the evidence you have heard, come to a decision, and restore this defendant to his family. In the name of God, do your duty¨ (Shmoop Editorial Team). The quote shows Atticus eagerness to win the case to not only prove a point but also for the greater good.
As he sat down at the police office, the guards asked questions with the intention of finding him guilty. He knew they wanted to get inside
Twelve Angry Men Reginald Rose’s film, Twelve Angry Men, revolves around the decision of twelve white male jurors to confine a young Hispanic man behind a prison cell. Initially juror eight stood alone as he put forward a notion that human memory is fallible, and could not be relied on as evidence. Through the jurors, Rose captures the essence of what`s wrong with the American justice system. Rose pursues the concept of prejudice, status, racial discrimination, arrogance, justice and the need for it to be served in the justice system. During the course of the film prejudice was instrumental in acting as the defining factor to prove whether the boy was guilty or not.
Juror Nine votes not guilty because he admires Juror Eight for standing alone against the majority. Once the jurors start to discuss the case again Juror Seven questions who else would have the motive to kill this boy’s father. Juror Eight rebuts by saying, “As far as I know, we’re supposed to decide whether or not the boy on trial is guilty. We’re not concerned with anyone else’s motives here” (Rose 240).
As the other jurors are yelling at him for saying that the boy could even be innocent and for showing them the evidence, Davis never lost his cool. He stood still and let them finish talking before he responded. After showing that it would take longer than 15 seconds for the neighbor to get to the door, juror 3, Angry, started to yell at him for saying that the boy had to do it. Davis responded without even raising their voice. Juror 9 didn’t feel way at one point and looked as if he was about to pass out, Davis helped him sit back down and even offered to get him water.
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.
“You can’t judge a book by it’s cover” is a quote that literally everyone has heard since before kindergarten. It basically means that you can’t judge a person based on what they look like. In the show, 12 Angry Jurors, there are 12 Jurors deciding the fate of a 19-year-old guy who may or may not have stabbed his father. Will he live, or be killed? Each juror has their own opinion on if the guy killed his father.