Not proven

I am predicting Tom Robison is not guilty. First, how the prosecutors witnesses talked on the witness stand. Heck Tate witness changes which side of Mayellas bruises are on. He also does little or no help being a witness because he never saw Tom at the Ewells house that certain day. He also only saw the aftermath of the incident. Moreover, Mr. Ewell the second witness was unsuccessful for many reasons with his lying. He first could not make up his mind on the descriptions of his daughter. Which…

In the film, 12 Angry Men, there was a lot of information that was given out that affected the jurors’. The story takes place in a courtroom where a murder case was in session. The rest of the movie shows the jurors, deciding whether the defendant of the case was guilty or not guilty. The jurors initially wanted to sentence the boy as guilty after hearing testimony of the boy that killed his own father, but there were three other jurors who thought otherwise. Since the boy was from the slums,…

Juror number three to me was very irrational with his thought process of convicting the boy of his guiltiness. I felt as though he thought the problems he had with his son were the same that this father and son had. Nonetheless this is not the case. The way he described he and his son’s relationship, made me believe that he was pushing his son into being someone that he wasn’t. The juror not only wanted his son to live in the same mindset as him, but he wanted his son to be him. However, it is…

In 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose, the author is able to maintain doubt as to the defendant’s guilt or innocence by never sharing definitive proof of the boy’s innocence. Instead, Rose creates characters that force the reader to question their reasonings. Without controversy and opposing sides, there would be no purpose to the play. Throughout the play, doubt is evident as to the defendant’s guilt due to Juror 8’s lone vote, Juror 3’s strong personal opinions, and the gradual change in views as…

Whisked away from their routine life to partake in a communal decision, the dutiful juror rationalizes the inconvenience caused by assuring their verdict's importance and sympathizing, "'Before God, that could be me on trial. If that were so, God forbid, I would want those in the jury to be as responsible as I pledge to be and as terrified of error as I am'" (Mamet ix). The juror, possessing the ability to connect their life to the person on trial, intends to seek accuracy in determining the…

A jury consists of 12 members of the public chosen to determine what they believe is the truth in a trail. The jury system is not an adequate means for the legal system to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused person. The film, “12 Angry Men” exemplifies why a jury system is simply unfair to the jurors and defendant in multiple ways. It shows the jurors’ frustration towards the disturbance of their personal schedules, their level of concern for the case, and how their opinions are…

Storm clouds above the jurors’ heads The jury rooms discrepancy in personalities in Twelve Angry Men Displays the struggles of having 12 strangers with completely different outlooks on the situation trying to reach a single verdict. In this trial these 12 men have a very unique way on trying to decide the fate of this young murderer, who can either be considered innocent or guilty. Specifically, this play shows the way an upbringing can specify a single character’s judgement upon another…

Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose, an 18-year-old is on trial for the murder of his farther. After many pieces of evidence were presented, the three that are weak include the one of a kind knife that the boy had used to kill the father, the saying “I’m going to kill you!” and the woman that seen the scene of the killing without her glasses. One piece of evidence that proves the boy’s innocence is the unique knife. The knife was a switchblade that the boy said he got before the crime scene at…

I am juror number three from the murder trial. I am writing to you so you can hear our reason on why we decided not guilty. I think the boy was not guilty. I think the boy was not guilty because there was no official evidence. The witness statements were not accurate. The first reason why I and the others voted not guilty because the witness didn’t give us good evidence. For example we had a witness who stated that he heard the killing take place. “The old man heard the boy scream, I’m…

According to “Getting under the Skin” by Scott Kraft, two men took a plea deal on a case their being charged with. Gorman was inking his friend Gonzalez, after that Gonzalez son a 7 year old saw his dads tattoo and was pestering and begging him that he wanted a tattoo like his, after the father denying him he finally gave in so Gorman started inking him. One day the child’s mom saw the tattoo and called the police, it shocked the whole community including the police department because of his age…