This demonstrates prejudice because according to the 8th Juror, the 3rd Juror is being prejudice since he just desires the boy’s death for his own personal reasons. Additionally, the fact that he doesn’t refute it shows that it is probably true. Another time when the 3rd Juror demonstrates prejudice is at the end of the story. He states, “The phrase was “I’m gonna kill you.” That’s what he said.…
Atticus also stood up for the innocent in tense situations. Juror 8 used his reasonable doubt to prove the boy innocent, just like Atticus Finch did, showing they have alike personalities and motives. By comparing Juror 8 and Atticus’s empathy, arguments, and compassion we learn that they share similar characteristics and motives. Due to Juror eight and Atticus’s empathy it showed that they cared.…
1 page 27) The wisdom of the 9th juror which has developed over the years through his experiences in life grants him insight which aids not only himself but some of the other jurors’ to come to terms with the innocence of the boy. Thus, the 9th juror’s age plays a major role in his decision-making.…
Not ready to accept change or reality at the first go. He was last one to accept not guilty. Jury 8: He has courage to go against the 11 jury members to stand in what he believe. He was compassionate and curious standing against all the odds and engaging the group courageously. He created a constructive dissonance that lead to extracting some finer details.…
My favorite character was juror number 8 because since the beginning he defended his opinion and throughout the film he never gave up until he made the other jurors agree with him and understand that what they were about to do was not right without giving out good explanations or evidence about blaming the boy of being guilty. Juror number 8 even made the other jurors change their mind and gave out strong enough reasons to demonstrate how the boy was not guilty over the old man's murder. I also like how he defended the boy and didn't let him get locked up for something he said he didn't do. This juror was also so calmed during the whole court and he never made a big deal about anything but just explain his reason and opinion.…
Juror eight appealed to the jury’s values. He told a story about the innocent boy (innocent when he was young) being harmed as he was growing up. The boy was beaten by his dad when he was young. 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).…
The greatest biases that create the conflicts of the play are due to the juror’s past history. Everyone has their own story. Therefore, when one can relate to a story, their understanding will be greater than others. This may create a positive or negative opinion, such as Juror Three. Juror Three, a failed father not in contact with his son, is the main holdout against voting not guilty.…
Juror nine is the old man with a quiet nature, but with an insightful remarks. He is the supporter-encourager of the group because he lets juror eight speak his mind without any judgement. Even though his votes were different than juror eight, the old man believes every person should have their opinions heard out especially a person like juror eight who is taking a stand on his own. Juror ten is the garage owner who has regular anger outburst like juror three the angry father.…
Another important fact was the defendant’s ethnicity and low socioeconomic class. Most of the jurors were mostly middle-aged, white males from the middle-class status. These descriptions were different from the defendants, which made it difficult for the jurors to be sympathetic to the defendant. Juror #5, however, had experience living in a slum area, and so he could sympathize a little for the young man, and after several votes, he voted “not guilty” for the defendant. This example exhibits that if the juror are similar, the juror would tend to sympathize with the…
Several of the jurors get up to see it better.)” (Rose 39). The actions of the jury demonstrate that although they might not care as much as they should for the boy since Juror #8 cares, they are willing to listen. Juror #8 argues the evidence given throughout the trial to prove not guilty with reasonable doubt. This sets both plays a part in the sense that John does not have supporting evidence to prove his ideas while Juror #8…
For the most part, each character I saw in the movie matched up with the picture my mind's eye had painted whilst I was reading the play. One thing irked me however: all the jurors seemed at least 10 years older that I had imagined them. For instance, I had seen Juror 8- the protagonist of the play and Juror 3- his rival, the antagonist as being perhaps 30-ish or so and spirited and vibrant in their arguments.…
Juror #8 In the play “Twelve Angry Men” the Juror No.8 was a very important character, without him there would not have been any conflict and the young boy would have been executed without a proper trial. An Architect by profession, he stood out from the rest of jurors. He had the gift for intuitive thinking, understanding complex human relationships and inspiring others. He believed in trial-by-jury system and did his best to have the necessary procedures to come up with a fair outcome.…
Except for juror number eight, peer pressure impaired their judgment. Based on his maturity level it indicated that the greatest differences are found in juror number eight and three. Once juror (Jack) changed his vote from guilty to not guilty only because the rest of them eventually voted not guilty also. It showed many times that the several jurors changed their minds from not guilty to guilty and vice versa under peer pressure, and overpowering of the strong willed ones.…
He is a leader which has ability to influence others person decision. He decision style is combination of directive and analytical. Juror 8 has forms alliance with juror 9, juror 11 and juror 2 which have ambiguous roles. His logical thinking and good team player able to guide the deliberations which other jurors agree with him. Establish good relationship and form a trust with jurors are one of the tactic of Juror 8 which able to change the results of the vote.…
Observe Juror #8 (Henry Fonda) as the leader. In the movie, Juror #8 is able to persuade his fellow jurors to change their opinions. Based on what you have learned in class, describe the leadership style he uses to do this. Present your analysis providing evidence from the film to support your position.…