12 Angry Mn

In: English and Literature

Submitted By laurie1638
Words 971
Pages 4
“It's very hard to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this. And no matter where you run into it, prejudice obscures the truth.' “Tjhis phrase sums up the basis of ‘Twelve Angry Men' by Reginald Rose. This play is about a young delinquent on trial for the murder of his abusive father. The jury must find him guilty if there is no reasonable doubt, and in turn, sentence him to death. “‘I don't envy your job. You are faced with a grave responsibility.” People's bias and predispositions can affect their opinion of different circumstances and different people. This is very evident throughout the play. After the first group vote and juror 8 votes not guilty, a discussion ensues. It is there that the jurors' personal prejudices come out and we the readers/viewers are able to see how this has influenced and shaped what they think. There are many significant views and values that Reginald Rose demonstrates in 12 Angry Men the most important one being that prejudice constantly affects the truth and peoples judgement. As the jurors argue between themselves as to whether a young boy is guilty of stabbing his father it is shown that “It’s very hard to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this.”
This is most evident in the way juror #3 and juror #10 come to their decision that the young man is guilty as they bring in there prejudice against young people and people from the slums to make their judgement without considering the facts of the case. Rose uses juror #8 who can see the whole trial because he is calm, reasonable and brings no prejudice as a prime example of what a juror is supposed to be like. Juror #10 is the character who brings in the most prejudice to the jury room as he has formed his decision from the moment he saw the young boy and sees no reason for him to waste any time debating on whether the defendant is guilty. His prejudice comes from the…...

Similar Documents

12 Angry Men

...12 Angry Men The 12 Angry Men movie was a perfect example of the Bruce Tuckman Scheme. Once the Jurors go in for deliberation they immediately start two get into the stages of the scheme. Once they are all in the juror’s room and get settled they start the storming stage. As soon as the juror’s get into the storming stage there is a lot of arguing. By the time they start the norming stage the juror’s are still arguing with one another but they are starting to listen to the people who are trying to show there opinion of reasonable doubt. By the end they all get to go home once they come to a unanimous decision. When the juror’s enter the room at the beginning of the movie they automatically start the forming stage to get each to know each other. When they first get into the jurors room most of them are ready to vote guilty and go home. When juror eight votes not guilty all the other jurors got really mad. At that moment they entered into the forming stage. Juror eight explains to the others why he felt that the defendant was not guilty. They all voted again and anonymously and one juror had changed his mind. After the second vote the other ten jurors got even more upset because they new they were going to be there even longer. The jurors entered into the norming stage as juror eight explained all the reasons why he had voted not guilty. As he explained each of his reasons for not voting the defendant guilty, one by the jurors started to change there opinion about......

Words: 445 - Pages: 2

12 Angry Men

...12 Angry Men – Case Review During this movie, Fonda had three different styles of conflict, based on which situation he was in. In critical situations, he was competing with others to give the kid another chance before saying “guilty”. Also, sometimes he was collaborating: when he was talking with someone to win him to his side, he used to search for mutual beneficial outcome. Finally, the most used style was compromising. You see it clearly when Fonda tried to give some points to the opponent by saying: let’s assume that your point is valid, and then they build on this point. Fonda was so persuasive! He clarified that he is not trying to change anyone’s mind. However, he presented himself as an open-minded person who seeks truth and justice. He honestly tried to understand others’ point of view, and never accept any piece of information as a given fact. Rather, he used to test each piece of information and showed clearly that they must be very careful before sending somebody to death. Moreover, Fonda gambled to establish credibility until he found the first person to believe in him. Another reason for Fonda’s success is his avoidance of common mistakes. He never tried to make his case with an up-front, hard sell. However, he was asking about “reasonable doubt”. Also, he did not resist compromising, especially when it was necessary to move to the next point. In addition, he did not overestimate his ability in presenting great argument. Rather, he used......

Words: 295 - Pages: 2

12 Angry Men

...2B 12 Angry Men Evidence Essay There is a lot to debate about murder cases.there is an especially large amount of evidence to debate in the play “12 Angry Men”. The evidence provided for the trial was easily disproven by the jury members thus proving the defendant innocent. The old man’s testimony proved the defendant innocent. He claimed to have heard the boy yell “I’m going to kill you” and then saw the boy running off seconds later. During this time a train was passing by, and because of the man’s age he needed a cane to walk. This proves he couldn’t of heard the boy yelling and he couldn’t of walked fast enough to see him run off. The old woman’s testimony was more doubtful than untrue. She claimed she had seen the boy murder his father from her bedroom window. The problem is the fact that she needs bifocals to see clearly, and the train was passing between their apartments during the time of the murder. She wouldn’t of been able to see clearly enough to identify the murderer . This rules in favor of the boy’s innocence. The knife wound was also suspicious. The wound was created by a downward stab to the chest. This probably would’ve been insignificant if the defendant didn’t have knife fighting experience. In a knife fight the contenders would of being stabbing upward in hopes of driving the knife in deep. This makes it less possible that he would’ve stabbed downward. All in all, it’s proven that the defendant was......

Words: 292 - Pages: 2

12 Angry Men

...• Study Guides and Literature Essays • Editing Services • College Application Essays • Writing Help • Q & A • Lesson Plans • Top of Form [pic][pic] Bottom of Form [pic] Home : 12 Angry Men : Study Guide : Quotes and Analysis 12 Angry Men Quotes by Reginald Rose [pic]                  [pic] [pic] • Buy PDF • Buy Paperback Quotes and Analysis 1. JUDGE'S VOICE: ...and that concludes the court's explanation of the legal aspects of this case. And now, gentlemen of the jury, I come to my final instruction to you. Murder in the first degree - premeditated homicide - is the most serious charge tried in our criminal courts. You've listened to the testimony and you've had the law read to you and interpreted as it applies to this case. It now becomes your duty to try and separate the facts from the fancy. One man is dead. The life of another is at stake. I urge you to deliberate honestly and thoughtfully. If this is a reasonable doubt - then you must bring me a verdict of "not guilty." If, however, there is no reasonable doubt - then you must, in good conscience, find the accused guilty. However you decide, your verdict must be unanimous. In the event you find the accused guilty, the bench will not entertain a recommendation for mercy. The death sentence is mandatory in this case. I don't envy your job. You are faced with a grave responsibility. Thank you, gentlemen. 6 This...

Words: 8375 - Pages: 34

12 Angry Men

...12 Angry Men depicts the New York murder trial. The premise is the trial of a frightened, teenaged defendant accused of stabbing and killing his father. The judge advises the 12 jurors, that a unanimous decision needs to be made with fair and unbiased manner. If the jury decides unanimously that the boy is guilty he will be sentenced to death. However, if there is a reasonable doubt, the jury needs to reach a ‘not guilty’ decision, and the boy will be freed. A life and death decision needs to be made. The process whereby the difficult decision is reached illustrates a situation where a minority transforms the opinion of a majority by exerting persuasive tactics. The group is challenged by various opinions, intense frustrations, and lack of participation, stubbornness and indifferent attitudes. Throughout their deliberation, they fluctuate between difference, disagreement, controversy and contention. Their prejudices, personalities, cultural differences, weaknesses, priorities, socio economic, ignorance and fears often cause them to avoid the true issues of the case. This makes the jury find it difficult to reach its final verdict. At the beginning, The Judge gave the jurors a speech about their responsibilities in their deliberation. But he was not potent and forceful enough in his deliver, which was kind of boredom. This failed to convey to many of the jurors the importance of their role as a juror. When the deliberation starts, many of the jurors just want to quickly......

Words: 1019 - Pages: 5

12 Angry Men

...12 Angry Men By pacaf123 | Studymode.com 12 Angry Men Mid Term PROC 5840 Directed by: Sidney Lumet Writing credits: Reginald Rose (story and screenplay)   Table of Contents Table of Contents2 Cast3 Major Case Issues4 Juror #85 Juror #49 Juror #312 References15   Cast 1957 ActorJuror #Character DescriptionOrder of 'not guilty' vote Martin Balsam1/The ForemanThe jury foreman, somewhat preoccupied with his duties; proves to be accommodating to others. An assistant high school football coach9th John Fiedler2A meek and unpretentious bank clerk who is at first domineered by others but finds his voice as the discussion goes on.5th Lee J. Cobb3A businessman and distraught father, opinionated and stubborn with a temper; the antagonist12th E. G. Marshall4A rational stockbroker, unflappable, self-assured, and analytical11th Jack Klugman 5A young man from a violent slum, a Baltimore Orioles fan3rd Edward Binns6A house painter, tough but principled and respectful6th Jack Warden7A salesman, sports fan, superficial and indifferent to the deliberations7th Henry Fonda8An architect, the first dissenter and protagonist. Identified as "Davis" at the end1st Joseph Sweeney9A wise and observant elderly man. Identified as "McCardle" at the end2nd Ed Begley10A garage owner; a pushy and loudmouthed bigot10th George Voskovec11A European watchmaker and......

Words: 3647 - Pages: 15

12 Angry Men

...Defiance Of course, one of the famous, attractive and effective movies, which illustrate jury trial system in the US, is Twelve Angry Men (1957). American Film Institute revealed that the movie was the second best film in the Court Drama genre (AFL’s 10 Top 10). Exploration of this film, when jury trial does not happen in Islamic Court, deeply influenced the concepts such as the true judgment and justice in my mind as a Muslim. This paper is aimed to discuss and analysis several instances of defiance behaviors, which are displayed in the movie. It also considers strategies groups utilize to extinguish defiance in each instances of defiance. The first scene; all jurors sat around the table exception for the foreman who concerned to keep formal procedure in the group. He mentioned if all jurors get a unanimous verdict, the defendant would charge mandatory death sentence. He started to count the votes “guilty”, while jurors were raising their hands. Juror number 1, 3, 4, 7, 10 and 12 quickly put up their hands but jurors 2, 5, 6, 11 and 9 raised with slightly pause. Juror number 8 was the only person who believed the boy is not guilty and he had not been conceived to put someone into a death sentence:”It's not easy to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first...We're talking about somebody's life here. We cannot decide in five minutes.” Certainly, it would be hard to become alone against the group. The juror number 8 is the......

Words: 1304 - Pages: 6

12 Angry Men

...The 12 Angry Men Case Dennis Ojwang Organizational Management 701 February 26, 2015 When this movie was made, no one could have depicted that it would greatly speak of the ever changing dynamics of our world today. Immigration and diversity seem to have plagued the world now more than ever and it is no surprise that the business world has been changed tremendously. When this movie came out in 1957, there wasn’t much diversity as we see it today. Upon watching this movie, various topics covered, ranging from power and influence, ethical decision making and diversity, group formation and dynamics, cultural diversity, organizational culture, conflict management and then, there’s an introduction of Fiedler’s leadership model. The setting of the movie offers consistency, investment, rigidity, autonomy and fairness in terms of assessing different levels of conflict and negotiation. I would say that the most evident styles of conflict in the movie are accommodating, compromising and collaborating conflict resolution styles. The jury is involved in a high profile case about a young boy who, if found guilty, then he will be sent to the electric chair. There are several topics that are related to organizational management class that will be portrayed throughout this jury process. The jury, in determining the fate of the young man, who murdered his father, must closely work together and whether consciously or unconsciously, they have been introduced to the forming, storming,......

Words: 1735 - Pages: 7

12 Angry Men

...Jessica Robinson Professor Romano 12 Angry Men When one get subpoenaed for jury duty, they seem to always want a case that is easy to render a verdict and it won’t take all of their time; well people can’t always get what they want. In the film 12 Angry Men, 12 men were chosen to sit on a jury for a murder case. A case that after hearing all of the evidence they assumed it was an open and closed case. A few of the jurors were very excited because they had baseball games to attend along with other personal events going on in their lives. All were ready to make the vote of a guilty verdict, oh but one. After calming down, stretching legs, and a little small talk, the foreman decided to assign that the setting would be in order from juror numbers 1 thru 12 around the table. They took a vote to see were everyone stood on their decision and there were 11 guilty and 1 not guilty votes. That’s when the other 11 had the opportunity to persuade the 1 to vote guilty, however, it was a difficult job. This one particular juror saw room for reasonable doubt within the testimonies of the witnesses and the remainder of the evidence and wanted to discuss them a little more. The reasons for voting guilty were all over the place. Some of the men had logical reasoning for the decision and others just had not particular reason at all, just because they thought he was guilty. Some assumed he was guilty because a woman who lived across from the......

Words: 964 - Pages: 4

12 Angry Men

...CASE STUDY: 12 ANGRY MEN In the grand jury room, the jury takes a vote. Eleven jurors vote guilty, and one juror, juror eight renders a not guilty vote. Jurors three, seven, and twelve criticize him, but juror eight says that he does not know whether the man is guilty or not but that it is not easy for him to send a boy to his death without discussing it first. After some argument, they agree to discuss the facts of the case. Juror three reviews what they know. An old man who lives underneath the room where the murder took place heard loud noises just after midnight. He heard the son yell at the father that he was going to kill him. Then he heard a body falling and moments later, saw the boy running out of the house. Juror four says the boy's story is flimsy. He said that he was at the movies at the time of the murder, but no one remembers seeing him there. Also, a woman living opposite looked out of her window and saw the murder through the windows of a passing elevated train. During the trial, it was verified that this was possible. Further facts emerge: the father regularly beat his son, and the son had been arrested for car theft, mugging, and knife fighting. He had been sent to reform school for knifing someone. Juror Eight states that too many questions were not asked during the trial. He asks for the murder weapon to be......

Words: 349 - Pages: 2

12 Angry Men Assignment

...pertain to the problem the group is working on. In this film, the numerous functional and dysfunctional properties of the 12-jury men play a big role in analysing and evaluating the main purpose at hand, namely identifying the young man guilty or innocent for the murder of his father. The different roles the 12-jury men play in the deliberation of the capital murder case is prominent. Firstly, a role can be defined as a set of expected behaviour patterns attributed to someone occupying a given position in a social unit. Different groups enforce different role requirements on individuals namely; role expectation, role perception and role conflict. (i) Role expectation: Role expectation can be defined as the role others believe a person should play or the way others believe a person should act in a given situation. When looking at the Jurors’ main role in any court system and in the film, it is expected of them to decide whether or not the defendant should be declared guilty or not guilty. (ii) Role perception: Role perception can be defined as the individual’s view of how he or she should act in a given situation. When looking at the film the Jurors individual frame of position and prejudices influence how they individually perceive the case. Because the Jurors perceptions are unique it leads to complications in the communication process. In the film “12 Angry men” Juror no. 3 decides beforehand that it is an “open and shut case”. He validates his verdict by using......

Words: 2018 - Pages: 9

12 Angry Men

...12 Angry Men Writing Assignment Final Exam Project Due: ________________________________________ (EDMODO) You will see a lot of psychological phenomena exhibited in the movie 12 Angry Men. Many of these phenomena are listed in the boxes on the next page. Your task for this assignment is to watch the movie, take note of these various psychological phenomena, and then write a cohesive 2-3 page paper discussing these themes. In writing your paper you must pick at least 5 separate incidences from the movie. For each incidence, describe how it relates to psychological phenomenon. Be sure to use concepts from across all of psychology. Do NOT, for example, just pick examples from social psychology (such as conformity and stereotyping); use examples from cognition, memory, sensation, and perception, etc. as well. In order to construct a cohesive essay, you should structure your discussion of the 4 incidences around a central area. That is, your paper needs to be more than just a loose collection of summary points. Consider how you can tie all the incidences together around a central psychological idea. * Behavior is determined by multiple causes: For any complex human behavior, multiple reasons exist as to why that behavior was done. For example, consider your study behavior. It is determined by intelligence, memory and attentional constraints, and social factors. * Behavior is shaped by cultural heritage: At several points in the semester we discussed how the......

Words: 717 - Pages: 3

12 Angry Men

...Juror 3- angry, loud opinionatedJuror 4- opinionated, nervous motion (he tends to pace the room), serious, logicalJuror 5- reasonable, uses his own experiences to make his arguments.Juror 9- would be seen as the mediator, the man who brings harmony to the process. He is older, retired, and he stands up for what he believes in without flinching.Jurors 12 and 7 are the followers of the group. They simply go along with whoever is talking at the moment.Juror 2- calm, shy, quietJuror 10- angry, loud, prejudicedBackgroundThe movie 12 Angry Men begins with a boy who is on trial for murder of his father. The jury, comprising of 12 men is locked in a room to decide the verdict of the case. 11 out of the 12 jurors are convinced that the boy is guilty, however one juror believesthat there is reasonable doubt for the boy to not be guilty. In the rest of the movie, the jury discusses the case and slowly the juror who believes the boy is not guilty, convinces the rest that there is reasonable doubt in the case.Communication barriersJuror 1 – This juror takes the lead and tries to keep the discussion in order. He tries to be fair to all jurors despite thinking the boy to be guilty.Juror 3 – This juror’s argument lies on his own prejudices and life experiences. He comes across as very angry, loud, opinionated and aggressive. He uses definite words like “I know”, “You can’t” etc. He fails to listen to the other jurors and stubbornly stick to his stand.Juror 4 – This juror tries to bring logic...

Words: 440 - Pages: 2

12 Angry Men

...12 Angry Men Analysis In the movie “12 Angry Men” there is a young man on trial for murder. The year is 1957, so the jury consists of all white, middle class to upper class, middle aged and up men. Some of their occupations consist of architect, salesman, broker and a man in advertisement. Which if you know anything about a jury today it is completely different. You have many different people of all race, gender, and social class, within that community, to receive a more fair trial. Also you can’t bring in any previous information into the trial or bring any emotional attachment into the case. Having a jury like in the “12 Angry Men” is not having a fair jury or trial what so ever, they are either going to all agree with each other, persuade one another or think like each other. One of the characters played by Henry Fonda goes against the grain, and votes not guilty. This really sends the other jurors up the wall, more particularly the head strong jurors. They want nothing to do with him and don’t want to listen to what he has to say. Henry Fonda speaks out and votes the opposite of all the other jurors. He does so because he wants to discuss the facts and the evidence, he isn’t convinced he is guilty or he is innocent. Fonda wants to do so because he does not want to but a boy to his death without discussing this matter into more depth. This is the boy’s life they have in the palm of their hands after all, and he couldn’t live with the guilt if he would have been peer......

Words: 1022 - Pages: 5

12 Angry Men

...MOVIE: 12 Angry Men As the jurors initiate the first vote, which was done publicly, it was obvious that conformity took place. In the words of Wikipedia, “Conformity is the process by which an individual's attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors are influenced by what is conceived to be what other people might perceive.” As they took this initial vote you can see how each are looking around to see how the next person is voting so that they can vote with the majority, even though they barely put in time to talk the case through – except Henry Fonda (HF). All except HF only has the concern of getting out of deliberation as soon as possible. HF truly would like to discuss the case in details and to look at it from all possible angles. While he may think the boy may have killed his father, he still believes he deserves a fair and thorough trial, especially since a guilty verdict sentences the defendant to death. Unfortunately, the high level of conformity caused the jurors deliberations to go on longer than it may have if everyone initially gave the vote they wanted with some sort of reasoning behind it whether or not it disagreed with the next man. The initial nonchalant vote caused some jurors to attempt to influence others in order to convince them of their case. Many of the jurors wrote off the boy based on stereotypes about growing up in the slums and belonging to a minority group. There were also some who were biased towards the evidence presented and only chose to reflect......

Words: 759 - Pages: 4