The fate of a young 19 year-old man accused of murdering his father was between 12 jurors and their arguments on weather or not the young man was guilty or not guilty. In this case the 8th Juror can be seen as the hero and the protagonist as he was the only juror to give some reasoning behind his vote and actually use his mentality in this risk taking decision. The next three paragraphs state how the 8th Juror is a hero by Standing alone to his beliefs and reasonable doubt and voting not guilty in the secret ballot also about how Juror #8 took some thought into his reasonable doubt and studying the testimonies and evidence and how he then changed the minds of 11 jurors in voting not guilty. Juror #8 stood alone at first he was the
…show more content…
The other 11 jurors gave their votes as guilty depending on their personal reasoning or stereotypes or just to get the case over with and not waste their time, which was not the ideal thing to do while a young man’s life is at risk with the charge of first degree murder. Him voting not guilty eventually forced other jurors to discuss the evidence and testimonies sent which was one of many heroic moves he has made. He stated how it was not easy for him to raise his hand and send a young boy to die. Which was a very wise and reasonable thing to respond to the other jurors questioning his decision of why he voted not guilty. Juror #8 used a very calm and orderly way, but other Jurors example Jurors 3 and 10 used a very aggressive and inappropriate way to argue against the 8th juror and why the defendant is guilty. Other jurors were not the happiest when they found out they had to go through the testimonies and evidence. They wanted a quick or “Fast vote” as how juror #7 expressed. It was heroic and brave of Juror #8 to speak out against 11 other jurors and go by why he thinks the defendant is not guilty and think through every step and give every evidence an explanation and stick to having a …show more content…
Juror #8 replayed the testimonies steps to make sure the witnesses information and assumptions given were true and accurate. Juror #8 was not sure yet the defendant did not kill his father, but he had a reasonable doubt about the case. Juror #8 didn’t see it as a waste of time to stay longer to prove the points and testimonies false or unreasonable. He wanted the unanswered questions answered Juror #8 had a peculiar feeling about this trial because of the defense counsel not defending the young man. Eventually Juror #8 wanted to exhibit the evidence while the other jurors believed the evidence given and thought it could not be logically false. So they did not really bother in discussing the reasons within the evidence given. Which is also another reason for why Juror #8 saved the defendant’s life if he also just went with what the evidence stated and not take a closer look at it, test it and prove it either true or false. Eventually after Juror #8 studied the testimonies and evidence and proved them false that changed the theory in the Jurors minds and their decisions made in the votes. The 8th juror took some thought into what he was saying he was very careful and precise while hearing and studying the testimonies. Eventually the jurors made up their minds and voted not guilty which took a lot of patients and bravery and evidence
The other 11 jurors gave their votes as guilty depending on their personal reasoning or stereotypes or just to get the case over with and not waste their time, which was not the ideal thing to do while a young man’s life is at risk with the charge of first degree murder. Him voting not guilty eventually forced other jurors to discuss the evidence and testimonies sent which was one of many heroic moves he has made. He stated how it was not easy for him to raise his hand and send a young boy to die. Which was a very wise and reasonable thing to respond to the other jurors questioning his decision of why he voted not guilty. Juror #8 used a very calm and orderly way, but other Jurors example Jurors 3 and 10 used a very aggressive and inappropriate way to argue against the 8th juror and why the defendant is guilty. Other jurors were not the happiest when they found out they had to go through the testimonies and evidence. They wanted a quick or “Fast vote” as how juror #7 expressed. It was heroic and brave of Juror #8 to speak out against 11 other jurors and go by why he thinks the defendant is not guilty and think through every step and give every evidence an explanation and stick to having a …show more content…
Juror #8 replayed the testimonies steps to make sure the witnesses information and assumptions given were true and accurate. Juror #8 was not sure yet the defendant did not kill his father, but he had a reasonable doubt about the case. Juror #8 didn’t see it as a waste of time to stay longer to prove the points and testimonies false or unreasonable. He wanted the unanswered questions answered Juror #8 had a peculiar feeling about this trial because of the defense counsel not defending the young man. Eventually Juror #8 wanted to exhibit the evidence while the other jurors believed the evidence given and thought it could not be logically false. So they did not really bother in discussing the reasons within the evidence given. Which is also another reason for why Juror #8 saved the defendant’s life if he also just went with what the evidence stated and not take a closer look at it, test it and prove it either true or false. Eventually after Juror #8 studied the testimonies and evidence and proved them false that changed the theory in the Jurors minds and their decisions made in the votes. The 8th juror took some thought into what he was saying he was very careful and precise while hearing and studying the testimonies. Eventually the jurors made up their minds and voted not guilty which took a lot of patients and bravery and evidence