Verdict

Men was about a trial of an 18 year old boy who was accused murdering his father. He was accused of stabbing his father in the chest with a pocket knife. The judge commanded that the jury needs to come up with a decision as to whether or not the verdict (the boy) was guilty or not. If the jury pleaded guilty, the boy would face the death penalty. At first everyone but one person pleaded guilty. As the movie progressed, more and more of the jury were convinced that the boy was not guilty and…

The movie shows how their decisions are based mainly on their own characteristics and personal life experiences. The testimony of witnesses, evidences provided were taken for granted and without even analyzing the case, were ready to give their verdict as guilty, to get it done and over with so they could go about their own business. Because of one Juror and his dissemination of evidences and witness testimony, the others started to see things in a different perspective. Juror 3 is an angry…

basically I’m looking for be on quest of justice to help other people who have been treated unfairly. The purpose of me writing this letter is to inform that all the jurors decided “not guilty” because it is a hung jury. We end up not having a right verdict to make up a better decision. Personally my vote was that the guy is “not guilty” because the man wasn’t sure who he really saw running downstairs. I do not live in a tenement, but it is close and there is just enough light in the hall so…

defendant. It seems that when having a preliminary vote, the juror number six hesitates for a moment. He does not raise his hand immediately, but rather waits for the reaction of the majority of the jury. When the juror number nine changes his verdict to non-guilty, the majority of the jurors in the room react with resent. However, the juror number six asks the other jurors to listen to what made the juror number nine to change his mind. He might have done it because he wanted to listen to…

The State v. Hunt dealt with a nineteen year old man wrongly convicted of the rape and murder of Deborah Sykes. This case, as established in the documentary “The Trials of Darryl Hunt,” is surrounded by many issues dealing to Hunt’s conviction. Of these issues, a couple stood out the most; police corruption, prosecution misconduct, photo lineup, false testimony, eyewitness testimony, jury selection, and so forth. As a tool, to help provide a better analysis, course materials will be used.…

adults in a jury or teenagers in high school. Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose details the deliberation of a jury over the fate of a sixteen year old boy accused of killing his father. When the jury first attempts to take a vote on whether the verdict should be innocent guilty, the vote is eleven to one in favor of guilty with Juror Eight standing alone on the side of innocence. He then proceeds to prove to the other jurors why the boy is innocent using the evidence presented during the trial…

irresponsible” to taking these allegations seriously and seeking justice. Unlike Wes, Juror 3 or 10 for example show no signs of changing their ideas against class or age. Their prejudice ideas are still a big part of their personality even when their verdict is ‘not guilty.’ Both texts still view the human race as flawed but each text perceives this idea in different ways. The texts Montana 1948 and Twelve Angry Men both view humans in as flawed in a pessimistic way. Watson and Rose both…

team by monitoring and improving its internal process. Twelve Angry Men, a movie about an open-and-shut murder trial in which one juror stands alone in his beliefs, made use of facilitation. When the twelve jurors were sent to deliberate a unanimous verdict, the case was not as clear-cut as they once thought. The jurors were made up of twelve men of diverse backgrounds. Their choice would either send an 18-year-old Hispanic man to death or set him free. When the twelve men were locked in the…

communication...stimulating social graces that make [it] easy to get along with others effectively (Mack, 2016).” There are disagreements but the jurors are able to communicate with one another what it is, or why they believe their decision for the verdict is valid. The jurors continue to cooperate under the facilitation of the foreman who acts as objectively as possible. The overall goal is to reach a unanimous vote whether disagreements arise or…

Rose depicts the injustice and prejudice often found in hasty decisions made by the other jurors so quick to find the boy guilty based on social class and upbringing. However, the 8th juror believes that the deserves at least a conversation before coming to a hasty decision that would end the boy’s life. The 8th juror presents the question “what if the facts are wrong” and forces a reexamination of the case in its entirety. He charges the men to examine “circumstantial evidence” and the…