12 Angry Men Reflection

Improved Essays
The film “12 angry men” takes place in a courthouse in New York City. There is a trial going on involving a boy that is being charged for murdering his father. His sentence if guilty is the electric chair. The only thing that is deciding his fate, is the jury 's verdict. Guilty or non-guilty? These twelve men of the jury will have to discuss and go over evidence to decide the boy 's fate. When the men sit down in the room it is very obvious that, most of the men do not want to be here. Also majority of the men think the boy is guilty, even without discussing the case. So they all take a vote on what the boys fate will be. Eleven of the jurors say death, but juror number eight votes not guilty. This is because he is not convinced of the boy …show more content…
Juror eight has very good observation skills. He almost is a detective juror, he seeks answers and he is good at creating scenarios to find answers. Juror eight gave his reason why he had doubt still, and why the other eleven should look the case over more. Juror eight then wanted to take another vote. He agreed that after his points, if no one else votes none-guilty that he will agree with a guilty verdict also. So they did a vote, but this vote was different it was a private vote. So the twelve men all casted in their votes. The foramen received the votes and open each on eagerly to see what the vote was. There was one more not-guilty vote. juror three after find this out gives juror five criticism, because he thinks that juror five’s vote was the not-guilty, and that he voted not guilty just because juror five grew up in the slums and felt bad for the boy. The viewers then find out that it was not juror number five who voted not guilty, it was juror number nine who voted guilty. He feels that juror eight’s point deserve to be discussed and gone over before they reach their “realist …show more content…
Juror eight then states that you have a hard time answering questions when in emotional distress. juror eight, then test juror four and ask him questions, like the boy would of had to answer. After the test juror two makes a good point using his great observational skills, He states that the stab wound on the dad was down word, the boy was at least five inches shorter, why would he stab down? Then juror five tells the jurors that when using a switch blade properly, you are not able to stab downward. He knows this from his previous slum life, where he saw knife fights almost

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Juror eight did a tremendous job of appealing to the emotions of the others; as his approach changes the minds of the jurors. For example, Juror number nine says “this gentleman has been standing alone against us, he doesn’t say the boy isn’t guilty, he just isn’t sure” (12 angry men 1957). This statement by juror nine gives the viewers an understanding on how good juror eight appealed to the emotions of the others. He did not say that the boy wasn’t guilty; he provided evidence, and showed the others that there are possibilities that the boy did not kill his father. The discussion continues as they bring up the testimony of the witnesses of the murder.…

    • 1678 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    12 Angry Men Film Analysis

    • 2025 Words
    • 9 Pages

    In the beginning, Juror 5 voted the young boy was guilty. He was later accused of changing his vote because he too grew up in a slum. He was not the man who changed his vote, it was actually Juror 9. As the meeting progresses, he does change his vote, and later uses his knowledge of the slums to convince the other men the boy is innocent. Another bias revealed during the meeting was by juror 10.…

    • 2025 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    “There were eleven votes for guilty. It's not so easy for me to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first.” (12 Angry Men). On the outside, he is a golden yellow because he gave a sense of hope for the kid that he was innocent through the middle of it all. Jurors that simply went off of their gut were repulsive to him. He didn’t understand as to why they didn’t want to make a change in the case.…

    • 1288 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    The boy who’s fate was in their hands was a 19 year old boy living in a poor area of New York who was on trial for murdering his father. This jury right from the beginning besides for juror #8 vote guilty right when they get into the jury room. This is nerve-wracking because this boy if found guilty, was going to be sentenced to death and 11 out of the 12 jurors vote guilty without even being in the jury room for five minutes. This is definitely an example of a constitutional issue because if it was not for juror #8, the boy whom was in deed innocent based on the facts of the case, would have been put to death by a jury whom just wanted to get the vote over with, so that they could get out of that very hot jury…

    • 1003 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Every juror, but one, raised their hands for guilty, some of the jurors slowly raised their hands after seeing the rest of the room raise their hand. The one juror who did not raise his hand angered the other jurors who wanted it to be an open and shut case, but the juror felt they needed to talk it out before sentencing a man to death. They decide to go over the evidence to please the man and…

    • 1076 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    12 Angry Men Thesis

    • 701 Words
    • 3 Pages

    What if you were on trial for first degree murder? In the movie 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose, a young eighteen year old male was on trial for supposedly murdering his own father. The twelve men on the jury were faced with different opinions and facts that questioned their morals and values in life. I feel as if this movie did have “worth” in my life. I think the movie had worth because no one should ever be stereotyped, judged, and accused based on what other people say.…

    • 701 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The majority of the jurors did not follow ‘innocent until proven guilty’, rather, they worked the opposite way. This is due to their personal biases. Under Juror 8’s influence, the men began ’talking for an hour’ using ‘reasonable doubt’, thus allowing the men to reach a sensible conclusion. This may have otherwise cost the life of a minor. The film exposes through Juror 8 that the superficial evidence should be dismissed to allow for deeper analysis of the case.…

    • 661 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    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, several 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 is the most influential because…

    • 992 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Why would he lie? What’s he got to gain, Nine: Attention maybe?” Eight makes a good statement when saying that the Old man’s view doesn’t make sense due to the El train blocking his view and hearing. Nine tends to agree with Eight saying that the old ma In the beginning of the play almost every Juror in the room picks “Guilty” except for Juror Eight. He believes that the boy is “Not-Guilty” saying that the evidence is somewhat false. Of course the other Jurors don’t believe it.…

    • 608 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He was described as a good decision maker, rational thinker, supportive, team player, open-minded, agreeable and good natured. Changes his decision based on the arguments put forth by jury 8. He gets convinced that there is reasonable doubt in the evidence which makes him change his decision to not guilty. Personality juror 12 was similar to juror 7 such as not interested, unfocused, non reasoning and indiscipline. But also described as an arrogant and impatient person.…

    • 1243 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays

Related Topics