The fact that he cannot "send a boy off to die, without talking about it first. The judge informs the jurors that they are faced with a grave decision and that the court would not entertain any acts of mercy for the boy if found guilty.
By focusing on the concept of reasonable doubt, he exposes the inconsistencies in the testimonies of the eye-witnesses and urges the jurors to question the "circumstantial evidence".
He is unwilling or unable to level with the others and is also unreceptive to any feedback. With a new understanding of himself he is able to change his vote to not guilty.
While most of the men are aware of the stigma attached to people from the ghetto they are willing to try to put the stereotype aside. His defenses start to crumble as his unconscious emotions become visible to him. Likewise, the mindless whistling of the 7th juror and the change of his vote to "not guilty" because he has "had enough" highlights his obvious apathy.
Specifically, and through the use of a real-time deliberation process, the playwright emphasizes how the integrity of the judicial system is undermined when the jurors arrive at the table clothed in their own personal experiences and prejudices. All evidence is against the boy and a guilty verdict would send him to die in the electric chair.
The movie illustrates the process of leveling and soliciting feedback which can make all the difference. Consequently, the 10th Juror is silenced and "defeated" as them men "turn their backs" on him acting as a powerful reminder that in seeking consensus in society, we must reject the "darkening" threat posed by venomous views.
In the stage directions he notes how he is reeling from the pain of being "stabbed in the chest" which foreshadows his revenge agenda and his rigid, patriarchal view of parenting. The 9th Juror, whose experience derived from his age and experience is vital, asserts that no one has a "monopoly on the truth" as "coincidences are possible.
The broken relationship with his son preoccupies his thoughts at several times throughout the movie; he is found staring at the picture.
The gradual self-awareness and enlightenment of many of the jurors helps the collective team more effectively scrutinise the evidence. A jury of twelve men is locked in the deliberation room to decide the fate of the young boy.
In a trial situation Jurors are asked to only consider the evidence presented to them. The 10th juror flippantly states, "A kid kills his father.
Arriving at an unanimous not guilty verdict does not come easily. The net result is a large blind area. In many ways, such diversity of provides a plethora of contexts for identification which in turn helps the jurors gain an insight into the flaws of the evidence.
The deconstruction of these obstacles finally paves the way for an honest and just outcome. He does not know and he never will. This is alluded to in a conversation between juror 7 Jack Warden and himself.
Rose suggests this attitude, which is compounded by the heat, is counterproductive to the notion of active citizenship. However, the play serves as a source of inspiration to the strength of the judicial process should the principles of justice be appropriately upheld.
The deconstruction of these obstacles finally paves the way for an honest and just outcome. Gradually they are won over by his arguments and even the most narrow minded of his fellow jurors hesitantly agrees with him.12 Angry Men: Sample essays (justice/jurors) shortcomings are flagrantly obvious.
However, owing to the integrity and perspicacity of the 8 th juror and his insistence the principles of justice and reasonable doubt, he orchestrates a careful examination of the circumstantial evidence.
As Rose clearly shows, honouring these safeguards not. Included: 12 angry men essay content. Preview text: In an era when America was attempting to find her identity and heal divisions wrought by Cold War hostilities, Reginald Rose, in his didactic play Twelve Angry Men, affirms the dire importance of a diverse jury's ability to deliver justice to its peo.
Twelve Angry Men Plot Summary Essay example; Twelve Angry Men Plot Summary Essay example. Submitted By bcvvvvv. Words: Pages: 3. Open Document. Twelve Angry Men Plot Summary A teenaged Hispanic boy has just been tried for the murder of his father, and the case is now in the hands of the jury.
The Twelve Angry Men Juror 3 and Juror. Free 12 angry men papers, essays, and research papers.
The Twelve Angry Men Juror 3 and Juror 8 Comparing Essay; The Twelve Angry Men Juror 3 and Juror 8 Comparing Essay Twelve Angry Men Plot Summary Essay example. Twelve Angry Men Plot Summary A teenaged Hispanic boy has just been tried for the murder of his father, and the case is now in the hands of the jury.
The Problem of Groupthink in 12 Angry Men Essay - The term groupthink in this report is defined as, the social psychological phenomenon that results in groups during pressure situations.
This social psychology theory is broken down into eight signs.Download