Stephanie Wheeler
Professor Abdul-Hakim
Communications 102
9 November 2015
Twelve men in a room determine the fate of one boy’s life. Did he do it? If not, who did? Why would a young man kill his father with a switchblade? Most of the men in the room came to the conclusion that the young man was guilty as charges with deliberation. But one man out of the twelve stood his ground and had the guts to disagree with the others and professed that he believed that the man could not be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt tot conflicting information. Through verbal and nonverbal communication, the isolated juror that stood up for him convinced the other jurors the boy was innocent. It was the power of persuasion, against prejudice, bias,
…show more content…
An example of non-verbal communication, I noticed, was the wiping away of sweat. That to me was showing how hot it was in the room. It is said in the film that it is summer, but the acts of wiping foreheads and removing jackets make the viewer understand how unbearably hot it is the small jury deliberation room. It’s hot inside the room and the men are uncomfortable is part of what makes the men meet Juror eights, not guilty vote with such resistance. Another form of non-verbal communication throughout the film included facial expressions of surprise as more and more men turned their vote from guilty to not guilty, as well as body language. The change in body language is a big part of nonverbal communication. As the men in the film were discussing the murder weapon, and the knife is brought into the room, was a perfect example of body language without the need for words. The jurors are discussing the fact that the knife was purchased at a pawnshop, and it was the only one of its kind the show owner had ever sold. Juror eight stands up, and takes the exact same knife out of his pocket, sticking it into the table right beside the murder weapon. Every man in the room jumps up in surprise. They are obviously surprised by the fact that the juror had a switchblade, which is said to be illegal to purchase, but also that the …show more content…
He made it a point to mention as many times that the boy’s father was a criminal, implying that it’s the defendant’s fault he came from where he did. He states that the boy was born into the ghetto are violent by nature, and will become alcoholics and violent. I think that perception is a part in the film because, of the perception, you have on the case. The next important type of perspective would be the perspective on the defendants, if there were a thought of them used against them in the
Similarly ,In Twelve Angry Men Juror 8 is a smart and moral juror who is willing to stand against all the other jurors for what he thinks is right. He is the main protagonist who believes a boy accused with murdering his father deserves a discussion prior to a guilty verdict. Although all the other jurors initially voted guilty, juror 8 believed that the jurors should not “send a boy off to die without talking about it first”(Juror 8, 12). Throughout the play Juror 8 combats the pressure from the other Jurors to just vote guilty and manages to convince his fellow Jurors one by one that there in fact is “reasonable doubt”(Judge, 6) and convinces them to arrive at a “not guilty”(Juror 3, 72) verdict. Reginald Rose extols Juror 8’s pursuit of justice through his success. Not only did Juror 8 stand by his principles and have the courage to stand against all the other Jurors, he also had the wits to convince his fellow jurors to change their verdict. Through these actions Juror 8 brings justice to the courts of New York city saving the life of a young boy.
Observe Body Language - This is a very powerful form of non-verbal communication. It is shown by the way we stand, how we place our hands or arms, make gestures and facial expressions.
You're not gonna tell me you believe that phony story about losing the knife, and that business about being at the movies. Look, you know how these people lie! It's born in them! I mean what the heck? I don't even have to tell you. They don't know what the truth is! And lemme tell you, they don't need any real big reason to kill someone, either! No sir! [Juror 10, page 51] This type of prejudice offended many of the other jurors, especially Juror 5 who is of similar race to the accused.
Reginald Rose’s ‘Twelve Angry Men’ is a play which displays the twelve individual jurors’ characteristics through the deliberation of a first degree murder case. Out of the twelve jurors, the 8th Juror shows an outstanding heroism exists in his individual bravery and truthfulness. At the start, the 8th Juror stands alone with his opposing view of the case to the other eleven jurors. Furthermore, he is depicted as a juror who definitely understands the jury system and defends it from the jurors who do not know it fully. At the end, he eventually successes to persuade the eleven other jurors and achieves a unanimous verdict, showing his
The setting of 12 Angry Men is a jury deliberation room where the jurors are and required to decide the guilt or innocence of an 18 year old that is accused of committing first-degree murder by stabbing his father with a switchblade knife. Witnesses were presented to give evidence of hearing a quarrel; hearing a threat to kill, and have seeing the boy run away. Another witness swore to having seen the boy stabbing his father from a window across from where the murder occurred. Eleven jurors were convinced the boy was guilty and deserved the death penalty. One raised questions he felt had not been asked or had not been pursued by the defense.
Throughout the play, juror three interrupts others in mid-sentence and attacks their opinions hoping to quash them quickly before they pollute his own flawless opinion and doubt has a chance to creep into the dark crevices of his mind. For instance, when juror eight surprises the group with a second knife, juror three is already angry, too angry. His voice rises and shakes with an animal-like ferocity. "You pulled a real bright trick here. Now supposing you tell us what you proved here. Maybe there are ten knives like that one. So what?" Not thinking that this put a dent in his case, juror eights brains have overcome the emotions of juror three.
The 3rd Juror says that “everybody deserves a fair trial.” Does the defendant in this case get a fair trial?
Inside a room where life or death decisions are made, twelve men sit with wandering thoughts. The made up minds of some jurors are to send a boy to his death without a second thought, but one other juror may change that. Inside of the play Twelve Angry Men written by Reginald Rose, Juror 8 has the persuasive evidence to change the minds of his fellow Jurors and save a boy from his execution. The other Juror’s seem like they won’t budge with their mind set on the decision of guilty, but after Juror 8 proves his thoughts on the decision of innocent, he may just be able to save a young life.
The old man gave evidence that he heard the boy say “I’ll kill you” from his apartment below and that he saw the boy running from the down the stairs from the apartment after rising from his bedroom. The old lady saw the boy kill his father through her window, whilst a train was passing. Juror #8 analyses each of these points and makes credible arguments that the conclusion is flawed based on incorrect reasoning, by pointing out inconsistencies in the conclusions reached. The other jurors are content to believe that their reasoning is solid, as they have used examples of deductive reasoning to reach their conclusion. Juror #3 gives his reasons for reaching the conclusion that “It’s quite clear that the boy never went to the movies that night, returned home and killed his father with the knife as identified in Court” (Fonda & Lumet, 1957). Until Juror #8 takes out a similar knife and poses the question that it was possible that another knife was used, Juror #7 calls it a million to one however Juror #8 persists in saying it was possible. He also uses this analysis method to cast aspersions on the second point and third points raised by systematically analyzing each component.
When at first Davis was the only not-guilty vote, the other jurors were furious demanding to know why he was the one thing keeping them in the sweltering room. He then explained why he thought the boy might not be guilty in a highly persuasive, logical, and calm manner. Then, after feeling like he was losing an uphill battle, told the men he would concede if he was still standing alone after a re-vote, but thanks to his argument he didn’t stand alone and the fight continued. The men, though maybe not at first, came to respect him for standing alone. He fought for the voiceless and one by one other’s raised theirs for the cause. At the end of the movie, juror number 3 found himself in Davis’ shoes—fighting alone for his cause. Yet, he used anger, emotion, and hate to fuel his argument and thus, was unable to win any of the men back to his side. The boy was saved because of Davis’ rational and levelheaded approach to
“A person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.” In the play Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose, a 19-year-old is on trial for the murder of his father. After many pieces of evidence were presented, the three that are shaky include the height of the father, the woman who saw from the el train, and the old man who saw the boy running down from the stair. Based on these, the boy is not guilty.
The complexity of justice is evident in Reginald Rose’s ‘Twelve Angry Men’, through the employment of Truth throughout the American 1950’s judicial system. Throughout the text, the concept of justice is forged by the racal prejudices, personal bias, emotion, logistics, and reasoning of the Jurors, thus allowing truth to hinder or prevail. Justice is shaped by truth in ‘Twelve Angry Men’, as the Jurors begin to understand the reasonable doubt in the evidence against the defendant, as the truth becomes prevalent through the Juror’s deductive capabilities, thus allowing for injustice to be hindered by the truth, which ultimately leads justice to prevail in the judicial system.
In 12 Angry Men, Juror #8 tries to convince the other jurors that the defendant of the case, an 18 year old boy accused of stabbing his father to death, is not guilty based on a reasonable doubt. Throughout the film Juror #8 goes over the facts and details of the case to point out the flaws in the evidence in order to prove there is, in fact, a reasonable doubt. The film depicts the struggles of the underdog and going against the majority in order to stand up for what is right. In one scene, the piece of evidence being put into question is a testimony from an elderly man who lived below the boy and his father and claimed he heard the murder happen and saw the boy leave the apartment after it happened. It is being put into question whether the elderly man who walked with a limp could make it to his doorway in order to witness the boy running away from the crime in fifteen seconds.
For this assignment I was asked to look at two video clips and compare and contrast the usage of verbal and nonverbal communication in them. The videos that I chose to watch were both apology speeches made by Tiger Woods and Bill Clinton.
One of the most valuable abilities an individual can possess is dauntlessness and the art of persuasion. In the film 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose, twelve members of the jury must determine and issue a final decree on whether an inner-city teenager is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or not guilty of his father’s murder. Despite the numerous factual evidence provided, a majority of the jurors are convinced without reasonable doubt that the young boy is guilty and should be sentenced to death. These abilities are undoubtedly illustrated when one juror decides to stand against eleven jurors in transforming the fate of the teenage boy. The individual is Juror 8. He utilizes the act of courage to stand against the other jurors in what he believes is an unfair judgment and also uses persuasion to alter their decisions. Through analyzing juror 8’s dialogue and his employment of rhetorical techniques with each juror, the readers can discern his unique traits of courage and persuasion.