Reginald Rose

Prejudice can often be formed without one even realize they are prejudiced, many of the characters in 12 Angry Men, have done as such, allowing their prejudice to not allow them fully evaluate the case unbiasedly. Jurors three, ten and seven are swayed by their prejudiced beliefs against the accused, as the deliberate the accused fate, juror ten states “his type are no good”(12 Angry Men). This prejudice which all of them share, justifiers their neglecting to inspect the evidence and testimony given rather than simply accepting it at face value. The film 12 Angry Men conveys how difficult it can be to set aside prejudiced views through jurors three, seven, and ten. The film also enables the reader to see how prejudice such as past experiences, ingnorance or misinformation, and stereotyping can cloud ones judgement.

In this novel, twelve jurors are designated to choose the verdict of a case. A sixteen-year-old boy is accused of murdering his father. If the jurors’ verdict is guilty, then the boy will receive a death sentence. The chosen jurors are locked in a room to decide the verdict, guilty or innocent. At the beginning, only one juror chose to vote not guilty, for the sake of reasonable doubt. The juror made thought out points and persuasively changed all other other jurors minds. By the end, all jurors chose to vote not guilty, except one. This particular juror voted guilty because he compared the defendant to his own son, whom he had problems with. This prejudice blocked his mind, making him confuse facts with his own judgment.

The film begins in New York City in a courthouse, it is clear by the expressions on everyone’s face including the judge that everyone is tired and it has been a long trial. The viewers are told that an unidentified, young Hispanic male originating from the slums is on trial for supposedly stabbing his father to death. The viewers are also given the final closing arguments, including the testimony of two witnesses; one an elderly man saying that he heard the father and son argue then heard a body drop, and the other a woman who lives across the street who claims to have seen the boy murder his father. The Jurors and audience are told that if a verdict of guilty is found then there is a mandatory death sentence that will follow.

"Its not easy to stand alone against the ridicule of others". Twelve Angry Men is more than a play, it is a reminder of our social responsibility. Discuss.

The play showed the theme of “Stereotyping in the World” through the characters’ proper reasoning, communicating, and believing in good faith. Twelve Angry Men allowed the views of many different men to see past the outside of a person and look at who they actually are. The play will put the test of each of the jurors’ character and show that the clear theme in the play is “Stereotyping in the World.” The boy has been out in a life where he has no other way out of the setting and must live in. Even though he lives in the area does not mean that he is that category and so does the

I want to hear more. The vote in ten to two,” (Rose 25). As you can see, Juror #8 changes his vote to “Not Guilty”, even though he thinks it's wrong, but it’s for the right reason because he is giving his support to Juror #9, who feels strongly about the defendant being innocent even though there was a murder. This shows that Juror #8 cares about justice and is willing to stand up against a crowd to do what he thinks is right. At the end of the deliberation, the vote is 11 for not guilty and 1 for guilty, and Juror #3 stand alone. The 8th and 4th Jurors both make a short and final plea, and the 3rd Juror finally concedes, saying, Alright, Not Guilty,” (Rose 63). Furthermore, Juror #3 strongly believes that the defendant is guilty, but he has to vote not guilty, because it is the right decision even though he believes it is wrong. Juror #3 votes not guilty because even though he thinks the decision is wrong, because it is not easy to send off a boy to die when the vote is 11 guilty and 1 guilty. This shows that Juror #3 is doing something right and voting ¨Not Guilty¨ which was against his wishes. In conclusion, Juror #3 and #8 both make conscious decisions supporting what is right even though, in someway, they thought the defendant was guilty.

Jury #3 is so blinded by fury of his son that he lets it blind him from doing his job as a jury and not be bias.” ...That goddamn rotten kid. I know him. What they're like. What they do to you. How they kill you every day. My God, don't you see? How come I'm the only one who sees? Jeez, I can feel that knife going' in.” he was talking about his son and the fight they had two years ago but misinterpret it for the 18-year-old boy that is being convicted for killing his father. He doesn’t really know the kid; he just wants to see him take the chair. The movie showed a lot of prejudice, stereotype, group think, sociology, and racism. When your prejudice, racist and stereotype people because of their role in the society or gender. It prevents you from knowing them or in this case listening to the actual facts that is being stated or

In the beginning of the movie when Juror 1 starts off by a show of hands on who thinks the boy is guilty or not guilty, every single juror except for 1 raises their hand saying that the boy is guilty. Juror 8, the one that abstained says that he did not vote guilty because “ But we have a reasonable doubt, and that's something that's very valuable in our system. No jury can declare a man guilty unless it's sure”. Ignorance is also another main idea within the movie. Juror 10 has a distinct bias against people who live in slums, saying that “they’re born liars”.

The boy accused for the murder is an immigrant with a history of getting in trouble. The jury situation from the movie shows example of the groupthink phenomenon, a term coined by social

After hours of thorough deliberation the jury chose the verdict of not guilty for the boy who was accused of the premeditated homicide of his father. Now the problem was if the boy didn’t do it then who did? There had to be justice for both the father who was killed and for his son who was accused. All of the evidence pointed to the boy no other suspects were even thought of. At first the key pieces of evidence made the jury believe the boy was guilty but after the eighth juror changed everyone’s perspective on the matter, the evidence made the jurors believe there was no way the boy could’ve committed the

The film 12 Angry Men focuses on a jury’s speculations in a murder case. A jury of twelve men is sent to start speculating a first-degree murder trial of an eighteen year-old Latino accused in the stabbing his father to death. If the Latino is found guilty, that mean he faces the death sentence. The defendant of this case does not have a very convincing justification. The defendant says that the Latino had a knife that he claimed to have lost, and a few witnesses say that they heard someone screaming, some saw the actual murder happening, or some the boy running from the scene.

According the five Methods for Influencing Other Group Members - use of reason, assertiveness, coalition building, higher values, and bargaining - when Juror Eight said: “we are talking about somebody life here, we can’t just decide within five minutes, suppose we are wrong”, he used the youth human-being life’s important and the danger of a false decision as good reasons to force other jurors in analyzing the facts carefully. He then talks about the boy’s backgrounds for appealing to logic and rational thinking of other jurors. Juror Three was overt prejudice, hostility, and used “assertiveness” to influence the other ten jurors of jury provided an antagonist for juror Eight. Juror eight used “coalition building” method to seek alignment with other group members. He never says that he believes the defendant is innocent but his mantra throughout the movie was “it’s possible!” referring to the reasonable doubt, which he convinced others’ thought. Juror Eight continued to appeal other eleven juror’s higher values by repeatedly reinforcing their moral and judicial obligation to convict only if there was no reasonable doubt. He challenged each juror to look at the facts more thoughtfully. “Bargaining” is offering an instrument exchange. Juror 8 used this method when he said: “I want to call for another vote… If there are 11 votes for guilty, I won’t stand alone… But if anyone votes not guilty, we stay here and talk it out.”

Summary: Reviews the film Twelve Angry Men, directed by Sidney Lumet. Discusses the director's use of cinematic techniques, including lighting, music,and set design, to reinforce the themes of the story.

12 Angry Men is a 1957 American courtroom drama film adapted from a teleplay of the same name by Reginald Rose. Written and co-produced by Rose himself and directed by Sidney Lumet, this trial film tells the story of a jury made up of 12 men as they deliberate the guilt or acquittal of a defendant on the basis of reasonable doubt, forcing the jurors to question their morals and values. In the United States, a verdict in most criminal trials by jury must be unanimous. The film is notable for its almost exclusive use of one set: out of 96 minutes of run time, only three minutes take place outside of the jury room.

During the film, logic was required on everyone’s part. They were deciding on an eighteen-year-old kid’s life! It was not a decision to be made quickly. Mr. Davis realizes this and is the only one to vote ‘not guilty’ when taking the first vote (Lumet). Logic came into play because Mr. Davis thought logically about all of the evidence presented and because of this he felt that there was a reasonable doubt and could therefore, not sentence the young man. Throughout the rest of the film, we see more of the men thinking logically, for example, when Juror Nine realizes that the woman who claims she witnessed the murder, wore glasses and would not have been able to clearly see the boy if she claimed to be laying in bed trying to fall asleep. Another example is when juror number five, who grew up in the same area of town that the defense did, shows the proper way of using a switchblade knife, making a logical