Juror Essay

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

12 Angry Men, an influential and awarding winning film, is a unique movie that tells the story of twelve jurors who converse on whether the defendant is guilty or not. Despite its old age and different setting, the movie is a film worth watching as it provides real life scenarios and application of conflict management when confronted with a problem at hand and conflict from fellow members. In fact, the movie adequately portrays the occurance of groupthink, types of conflicts seen in small groups

‘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.' [Juror 8, page 53] Perhaps this best 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.' [Judge, page 1]

over the judgment of a murder case. Juror 8 is willing to stand alone with his vote “not guilty”. Trying to avoid the winner’s course, he demanded a conversation about the case despite the clear 11-1 vote on the guilt of the defendant. Juror 8 discredits his opponents’ arguments and uncovers their constraint thinking, he uncovering doubtful evidence, alienating hardliners and engaging in conversations. In the conversation it becomes obvious that not every juror bases his decision on the same facts

it may not have as many faults however some are still present. The play, “Twelve Angry Men,” written by Reginald Rose, is about a kid on trial who is accused of murdering his father. Testimonies given by neighbors are raising questions among the jurors. A lady from across the railroad tracks claims she saw the kid murder her father, she, however uses glasses and wouldn’t be able to see anything without them. A man from the apartment complex claimed to have seen the kid running down the stairs yet

jury in which one juror doesn’t agree with the rest over the verdict of the case that they all witnessed take place in the court. After much argument, hostility, and anger, all of the jurors change their vote from “guilty” to “not guilty.” This all happened through the strong efforts of juror #8 in which he got to the bottom of the logical facts of the case, and through the prejudices of his other jurors. This would make the protagonist of the play juror #8, since he was the only juror who was willing

the minds of an entire crowd. In this group of a dozen jurors you have very different personalities and also you have some men that want to be leaders and some that do not. Also the movie demonstrates that actions and behaviors of the twelve jurors. This is an example of small group communications. The juror that was the Architect in the suit was probably the strongest leader in the group. (12 angry men, 1957). Before the twelve jurors started to deliberate they were all very nice to each

boy is guilty or not guilty. If they decide not guilty, the boy is set free; if he is found guilty, the boy will receive the death sentence. In the beginning all but one agreed the boy was guilty; Juror 8, Mr. Davis, argues that the boy deserves some deliberation. Mr. Davis changed the other eleven jurors’ minds by using his core values such as keeping an open-mind, staying humble, and believing every life is valuable. By keeping an open-mind, Mr. Davis was able to look into the details of the facts

not be guilty. Also, the mood in the room was very dark when all the jurors got into the room one guy just wanted to go the baseball game, so he just wanted the kid to be guilty so he could get out of there. Plus the fan wouldn’t work at first so all of them were hot and were ready to get out of there, so I think they just wanted the kid to be guilty. If I was given this case to me

from time to time. In this film “12 Angry Men” it can be equated to daily activities involving decision making. In this film there are 12 men who have been tasked as jurors to make a verdict on a young boy who has been accused of killing his abusive father. When a vote is taken at first it is realized that of all the 12 jurors, juror number eight votes against all the eleven claiming that he is not sure if the boy is guilty and that when they have to discuss and come up with a verdict, since the jury