Jj Andy's Response To Frankie

Juror Ten points out that the woman was in the other side of the apartment who couldn’t sleep, so she put on her glasses and looked outside the window, and conveniently enough, she saw through the el train pass and saw through the windows the boy stab his father right on time. He claims that this is enough to prove the boy’s quilt beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt. This leads to an interesting contradiction. Previously, Juror Ten has been clear that he didn’t believe the boy because he was from an alien race, but now he doesn’t seem to have a problem with agreeing with the women, who also happens to be from the boy’s race. This is a phenomenon known as confirmation bias. This is a social tendency for people to accept or fish for evidence that confirms their preexisting notion and to ignore ones that deny it. As one can clearly see, Juror Ten is acting on his notion that non-white people are “natural” liars, but then when he sees evidence that the boy might be guilty, he temporarily forgets about the fact that they are liars and believes her. Juror Eight is quick to notice this and asks him why he is willing to believe her. This tendency in Juror Ten will blind him from the truth, but once Juror Eight goes into detail and unravels the inconsistency, Juror Ten has about the same hardship of changing his views on the boy as he had with believing the

James Vane expresses his untrustworthiness when he notices a male figure swooping in on his sister’s life, Sibyl. James Vane states “You have a new friend, I hear. Who is he? Why have you not told me about him? He means you no good” (Wilde 74). James Vane explains his view on the topic of Sibyl talking to Dorian. James does not trust that Sibyl is making the right decision to marry this man. James threatens Dorian because he doesn’t believe in Dorian that he can take care of his sister. James pokes at Dorian by telling him that he isn't good for her. His trust towards Dorian lacks when it comes to honesty and truth. James should stay true to his values and let Sibyl work out her life. The Victorian society demonstrates the non trust worthy atmosphere which causes the truth and honesty to lack. One encounters an example where Dorian speaks to Alan in hope he could assist in the tossing Basil’s body away. Dorian states “I have a letter written already. Here it is. You see the address. If you don't help me, I must send it. If you don't help me, I will send it. You know what the result will be. But you are going to help me” (Wilde 178). Dorian posses the threat of blackmailing Alan for his service to help dispose the body of Basil. Dorian writes a note and shows Alan

He would whisper things in her ear like “fresh meat” to scare her and intimidate her to the extreme. He would play with her hair while he was talking to the other girls at her table in the lunchroom. Every time Melinda would pass Andy in the hallways she would panic and walk somewhere else. Also Melinda tried to run away from her problems at school one day and skipped school to go to the mall. When she was on her way to the mall she was passing the bakery where she saw Andy by his car. It says she stopped in her tracks and she couldn’t even walk because of her fear. He then saw her and said “Want a bite” with a jelly donut in his hand. Melinda scared out of her mind ran. Andy was a bully as well as many others. Melinda had to find strength through all of this.

Finally, Juror 8 had a huge impact on this story. Juror 8 was very insightful with his opinions and evidence. He gave himself the ability to change the minds of eleven men and save the innocent life of one. Juror 8 was the only man out of 12 who decided to look deeply into the murder case and find little pieces of evidence that everyone else seemed to miss and used that to prove his points. For example, no one would have thought about how the woman who claimed she saw the murder from across the street may have not had perfect vision. Juror 8 found little details to prove that, like how she had marks from her glasses and may not have been wearing them when she looked outside. Not even the lawyers had thought about that and most little things like that were why the young boy was almost sent to his death. Juror 8 was a true hero and stood up to his own opinion and points even when others didn’t agree with him.

Just when you think everyone is going to agree unanimously there will always be a Juror number 8 who has a different aspect on the topic at hand. Juror number eight played a huge role in this film, without his strong judgement and logical answers there would have never been a discussion and might have executed an innocent kid. This film shows the importance of innocent until proven guilty. This films shows how one person can make a difference. This also shows how people can rely on eye witness testimonies and tend to speak aloud before they thought process the situation in front of them. Throughout the movie there were many psychological phenomenon’s that I could relate to but the few that I have discussed were thought of as most

She overcomes her fears by standing up for herself as she begins to realize that she needs to tell someone about what happened, and if she doesn’t, other girls might get hurt. As Melinda’s former best friend Rachel starts dating Andy, her rapist, she feels worried and wants to protect her friend from the “monster”, preventing the same thing that happened to her happen to Rachel, even when she was still scared and miserable. Eventually, she has the courage to finally tell Rachel about the secret she has been keeping to herself for so long “I didn’t call the cops to break up the party, I write. I called-- I put the pencil down. I pick it up again--them because some guy raped me. Under the trees. I didn’t know what to do” (183). Melinda also demonstrates her courage when she finally fights back against Andy when he tries to rape her for the second time as she refuses to stay silent and not do anything about it.“No, a sound explodes from me. ‘NNNOOO!!!’ I follow the sound, pushing off the wall, pushing Andy Evans off-balance, stumbling into the broken sink” (194). Even with all the things that she goes through, she still has the courage to stand by what is right, she eventually halts her silence and she opens up to others at the

He had such a bad relationship with his son because when the boy was young, he ran away from a fight and Juror 3 was not very happy. When the rest of the jurors are trying to convince Juror 3, Juror 3 starts and talking about how we can’t leave these “types of kids in the public which leads him to say: “I don’t care what kind of man that was. It was his father . That goddamn rotten kid. I know him. What they’re like”(72). Later on, when the son grew up, he got into a fight with his dad, Juror 3, who hasn’t seen him since. This experience probably left him with the impression that all kids take their parents for granted, and that they deserve fair/severe punishments. Juror 3 is not the type to provide the sharpest evidence or information, but he is very determined to prove that the accused verdict really did murder his dad. Juror 8 practically gives nothing away about his real life, probably because he did not want to add his own prejudices and biases to the case. Juror 3 gave both his rude personality and bias away in the

The main way that juror eight convinces the rest of the jury of the boys innocence is by bring up the ethics of the other jurors. The reason the juror does not convict the boy when they first vote is because the man believes that the boy’s life at least deserves to be discussed before he is sentenced. Most of the jury has other things that they would rather be doing instead of being in the hot jury room, for example one of the jurors has a ticket for a play that he will not make because of the deliberation. Another juror made his decision of the boy being guilty based off of the part of the city the boy was from, and not based on the evidence provided in the case. Juror eight reminds the rest of the jury that the boy is innocent until proven guilty; therefore, the defense does not have to prove the boy’s innocence,

But that statement made the third juror made saying he’d kill the 8th juror, but earlier in the play that’s exactly what the boy said to his father hours before the killing, and to the audience it shows how things can be used as an exaggeration. So, once that happens the votes are tied. Juror 8 now breaks apart the fact that the boy couldn’t remember the movies he supposedly saw, but says in that kind of state of trauma it could be difficult. They also discuss how the murderer used a switchblade the wrong way, and that there was no way that the boy would use it the wrong was as he was very experienced. Juror 8 goes on and sees if it was also actually possibly for the other witness (the woman) to actually see the murder. They test it as well and find it also highly unlikely that she put on her glasses in time enough for her to see. So, all that’s left on the “guilty” verdict is 10 and 8, and 10 changes his verdict to “not guilty” after being quickly shut down about his comments. So, now that only 8 is left, they have a somewhat difficult time convincing him, but he does change his verdict to “not guilty”. The story ends with the rain stopping and the knife still sticking in the

In the movie there was an allegation that a young boy had killed his father. The neighbor claimed to have woken up in the middle of the night, looked through the windows of a passing el train just in time to see the boy stabbing his father. Another neighbor stated that he heard the son scream “I’ll kill you”, heard the father’s body hit the floor, and made it to his front door just in time to see the boy running away from the scene. The neighbors “saw” and “heard” the incident, so to most of the jurors, being the realist that they are, they had no choice to believe the murder to be true. Davis, Juror eight, had an entirely different way of thinking.

In Pretty Little Liars the psychological and literal killer, A’s actions are heavily influenced and motivated by guilt from each character. In addition to A, one of the major characters affected by guilt was Emily Fields. In Season 3 when Emily’s first real girlfriend Maya dies, it takes a huge toll on Emily which later leads her to kill the killer. Emily does not feel remorse for avenging her loved one however some of the pain that she felt was guilt which also allows her to change from innocent and sweet to someone who can take care of herself. According to Edward Kubany, the author of the Academic Journal titled The Elaboration of the Multidimensional Model, “people often hold themselves accountable for the well-being of close relationship partners because of a role assignment and many hold themselves responsible for negative outcomes that befall in the relationship partner. Hence, harm caused to a close relationship partner is a contextual factor expected to increase the likelihood and magnitude of guilt” which is why it is inferred that Emily did the killing in a magnitude of guilt. In The Picture of Dorian Gray, the same can be said for Dorian. He wants to shrug off the sin and guilt of killing someone which can be shown by Dorian referring to Basil’s

Page 114: This question makes me wonder if people would actually believe what Melinda says if she speaks up. Andy, her rapist is well known, popular so the students might think Melinda is looking for attention. It’s sad to think that Melinda will never gain the trust of her classmates just because of an accident. I feel like the moment Andy confess everyone will feel bad for treating Melinda like that.

Since juror number 8 didn’t agree with the rest of the jurors, he had to support his claim with the evidence that was presented. He talked about the evidence that was collected from the crime. Some of the evidence is strong and makes sense. Juror number 8 made several good points and one of them was that it was not possible for the old man to have heard the yell. The juror claimed that the old man had poor hearing and there was a train that passed by the house around the same time the killing occurred. Therefore, how was it possible for the yell to have been heard? This evidence relates to the rest of the evidence collected. The old man was not a good witness to the case and so the juror had to continue to state the rest of the evidence in order to convince the other men that the boy was not guilty. Another strong point that the writer made in this film is the physical evidence that was used in the case. There was not much

A great example of how peoples beliefs can influence the way they think about other people.The juror number 11 sees the young man as still a child and in the men’s eyes all children are born as liars. They are incapable of telling the truth and therefore the boy would have had to kill his father and didn’t go to the movies that night during the murder like he said. This is backed up by juror number 4 who says that the boy couldn’t seem to remember the movie he saw or the actors that stared in the film. If he couldn’t remember that the movie then he must be lying about seeing the movie. But juror number 8 proves that not everyone can remember every little fact about every movie. The boy had just gone to the movies and came back to find his father dead on the floor and police arresting him. It is very unlikely that someone who went

In the beginning, as the jurors sat in that room taking votes they were all pretty convinced that the crime was committed by the boy. As they came around to juror number eight, he voted not guilty. This shocked everyone and he knew he had to explain, he had to use the power of persuasion in order to have a definite verdict for the case. As defined by Myers, persuasion is “the process by which a message induces change in beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors (Myers p.226).“ Juror number eight was the only one in that room that had a reasonable doubt of the crime being committed by the boy. Throughout the movie he came up with different scenarios as to what might have really happened, he gave reasonable explanations as to why the old lady might have