What Does Juror 4 Mean
Machine or Human? The 1950s was the time of the third major Industrial Revolution where machines are seen in every city and act accordingly with neither change nor emotion in every step they take. Similar to these machines is Juror #4 from the drama playwright, Twelve Angry Men, by Reginald Rose. In the play, twelve men in 1957 are presented with a case regarding a boy committing murder to the first degree, with Juror 4 and the other ten believing he is guilty, while Juror 8 believes he is innocent. Ultimately, this leads to Juror 4 and Juror 8 to use their wits and reasoning to persuade the other jurors to choose between “guilty,” or “not guilty.” In the drama Twelve Angry Men, Rose indirectly characterizes Juror #4 as reasonable, in order …show more content…
For example, Juror #4 counters Juror #11 with, “two points. One: in his state of panic he may not have heard the scream. Perhaps it wasn’t very loud. Two: if he did hear it, he may not have connected it with his own act. Remember, he lived in a neighborhood where screams were fairly commonplace” (Rose 40). Juror #4 does not attack Juror #11 himself for what he said but instead explains why he believes the defendant is guilty. He brings up facts that are relevant to the situation and his argument to make it more persuasive. While Juror #4 does hypothesize, it is a reasonable assumption due to all of the evidence he has already listed as well as the evidence brought in court. Moreover, Juror #4 describes how the witness “saw the killing through the windows of the passing el train. She says that the lights went out immediately after the killing but that she got a good look at the boy in the act of stabbing his father. As far as I can see, this is unshakeable testimony” (Rose 66-67). Most of the other jurors twist the facts and speculate in order to change it in their favor. However, Juror #4 does not do this and instead states the witness’ testimony as is, he does not add his personal opinion to it or tells the testimony in an overdramatic way. He simply states the facts to persuade the other jurors to believe the defendant is guilty. Essentially, J4
Twelve Angry Men, By Reginald Rose
333 Words | 2 PagesIn the drama, “Twelve Angry Men,” by Reginald Rose. A 19 year old boy is a suspect in the murdering of his father. A jury of twelve men is left to decide his fate, guilty or not guilty. Juror 10 is biased and a hypocrite, which helped them reach a unanimous vote of not guilty.
Not Guilty In 12 Angry Men, By Reginald Rose
394 Words | 2 Pages“12 Angry Men,” written by Reginald Rose, is a drama or play about a boy who is put on trial for murdering his father. 12 jurors are put into the jury room to discuss and come up with the boy's verdict, but they can't come up with a unanimous decision. Juror 8 stands alone with his opinion of “not guilty,” but he isn’t the only one who convinces the rest of the jury for “not guilty.” Juror 9 also has an impact on the vote to be unanimous in favor of “not guilty.” Juror 9 played an important role for the verdict to be “not guilty” by trying to prove other points against the boy being “guilty.”
Rhetorical Strategies In To Kill A Mockingbird And 12 Angry Men
526 Words | 3 PagesHe argues that there is reasonable doubt in the case and that the accused might not be guilty. Juror #8's credibility is further strengthened when he produces a similar knife that the accused used to kill the victim and shows that the knife is not as unique as the prosecution claimed it to
12 Angry Men Rhetorical Analysis
681 Words | 3 PagesThe jurors continually exhibit the opposite of the aforementioned emotions and beliefs. After the protest by the 8th Juror about the oddly quick guilty verdict voted on by the jurors, the 7th Juror dismissed him continually, “It’s just that we’re talking about somebody’s life here. I mean, we can’t decide in five minutes. Suppose we’re wrong? 7TH
What Is 12 Angry Men Jury Duty
1108 Words | 5 PagesJury duty is often regarded by most of society as a dull and tiresome obligation. Perhaps one would be inclined to change their assessment if jury duty meant you and eleven other men were the only thing standing between a boy and the electric chair. The teleplay Twelve Angry Men, written by Reginald Rose, tells the story of a 1950’s court case wherein a young man, under suspicion of murdering his father, faces the death penalty. The script centers around the twelve men of the jury as they decide whether or not the boy will live or die. As tensions start to run higher, the jurors get into intense arguments, sometimes letting outside biases overtake them.
How Does Juror Number 8 Trying To Raise Reasonable Doubt In 12 Angry Men
690 Words | 3 PagesHe takes the vote from 11-1, guilty, to 12-0, not guilty. Juror #8 believes there is room for reasonable doubt and refuses to back down until the jury agrees. Juror #8 uses persuasion when trying to raise reasonable doubt by acting out what the old man claimed happened and proving that the testimony given by the old man may not have been completely true. He acts out the testimony
What Does Juror 9 Mean In 12 Angry Men
500 Words | 2 PagesThen the mood shifts in Act 2, where Juror 9’s personality starts to unfold more. He shares key points in the evidence and is able to voice his opinions more powerfully. This generates a change in his vote to not guilty and he is the first out of eleven jurors to do so.. One of his key points is that the neighboring old man's testimony in court doesn’t add up with the murder. As he and a couple of the jurors including number eight uncover this lie from the old man, other jurors like number three and ten, disagree with their statements saying he wouldn’t lie.
Twelve Angry Men: Reasonable Doubt In The Justice System
651 Words | 3 PagesIan Marthaler Mrs. Coplin Composition 13 March 2023 Reasonable Doubt in The Justice System In the play Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose, twelve jury members must decide whether the son is guilty of murdering his father. They must unanimously agree on whether the son is guilty or not guilty based on the facts.
Character Differences In 12 Angry Men
1133 Words | 5 PagesWhile both end up voting the same way, their approaches throughout the majority of the film are vastly different. To start, the third juror is much more factual, stating in the film, “Okay let’s get the facts… and he ran to the door of his apartment and the boy!”(12 Angry Men) This immediately shows the viewer that Juror 3 will base the majority of his argument in fact. In contrast, Juror 8 feels that communicating with the other jurors and piecing together their views is a better way to solve the case. This is shown when Juror 8 says, “There were eleven votes guilty.
Juror 3 Stubbornness Quotes
310 Words | 2 PagesIn the play "Twelve Angry Men" by Reginald Rose, Juror 3 displays stubbornness as a character trait and it significantly impacts the story. The play follows the jury in a murder case, if the defendant is convicted he will be given the death penalty so it is critical for jurors to be open-minded. Juror 3’s stubbornness is evident when he states, “I don’t care whether I’m alone or not. It’s my right” (71). This quote highlights Juror 3's stubbornness as he refuses to listen to the other jurors and consider their points of view.
Examples Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men
741 Words | 3 PagesIn "Twelve Angry Men," written by Reginald Rose, the jurors base their decisions on their own prejudices rather than solely on the evidence presented in court. Throughout the play, various examples of prejudice are exposed, and these biases ultimately shape the jurors' decisions. In this essay, I will identify different forms of prejudice exposed in the play and explain how they impact the jurors' decision-making process. One form of prejudice exposed in the play is racism. For example, Juror 10 is openly racist and refers to the defendant, who is of a different race, as "these people."
Juror 3 In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men
434 Words | 2 PagesHe realizes this when he “contorts [his face] and he begins to pound on [the] table with his fist,” and “seems [to be] about to cry” (Rose 63). This is when Juror 3 realizes that his negative experience with his son has dictated his distaste toward the boy and that he had no real reason to oppose him as much as he did. Though being the most stubborn of the jurors, being able to re-examine the beliefs and opinions he is so fixated on empowers Juror 3 to be able to demonstrate personal accountability, showing how important personal accountability is to confronting one’s past and biases. Throughout the play, because of his loud and opinionated personality, Juror 3 assumes leadership of those voting guilty. This is in stark contrast to Juror 8, a thoughtful person who is willing to give the benefit of the doubt who is the first person to vote not guilty to give the boy a chance.
Examples Of Social Injustice In 12 Angry Men
803 Words | 4 PagesThis process continues throughout the course of the movie, and each juror’s biases is slowly revealed. Earlier through the movie, it is already justifiable to label juror 10 as a bigoted racist as he reveals strong racist tendencies against the defendant, stating his only reason for voting guilty is the boy’s ethnicity and background. . Another interesting aspect of this 1957 film is the “reverse prejudice” portrayed by juror
Juror Four In Twelve Angry Men, By Reginald Rose
519 Words | 3 PagesJuror four is a fact oriented character, who is the least emotional of the characters and continuously tries to keep the peace even ifwhen that means dismissing someone’s thought. He is involved in the conversation the entire time and comes across as insensitive at times dueo to his anesthetized
12 Angry Men Case Study
858 Words | 4 PagesJuror 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!
More about What Does Juror 4 Mean
Twelve Angry Men, By Reginald Rose
333 Words | 2 PagesNot Guilty In 12 Angry Men, By Reginald Rose
394 Words | 2 PagesRhetorical Strategies In To Kill A Mockingbird And 12 Angry Men
526 Words | 3 Pages12 Angry Men Rhetorical Analysis
681 Words | 3 PagesWhat Is 12 Angry Men Jury Duty
1108 Words | 5 PagesHow Does Juror Number 8 Trying To Raise Reasonable Doubt In 12 Angry Men
690 Words | 3 PagesWhat Does Juror 9 Mean In 12 Angry Men
500 Words | 2 PagesTwelve Angry Men: Reasonable Doubt In The Justice System
651 Words | 3 PagesCharacter Differences In 12 Angry Men
1133 Words | 5 PagesJuror 3 Stubbornness Quotes
310 Words | 2 PagesExamples Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men
741 Words | 3 PagesJuror 3 In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men
434 Words | 2 PagesExamples Of Social Injustice In 12 Angry Men
803 Words | 4 PagesJuror Four In Twelve Angry Men, By Reginald Rose
519 Words | 3 Pages12 Angry Men Case Study
858 Words | 4 Pages