How would you feel if you knew that one decision you make could decide someone’s fate? How would you make sure you make the right, just decision? How could you decide knowing you could end the life of an innocent victim or let a murderer go free? In the motion picture drama, 12 Angry Men, directed by Sidney Lumet, twelve men are given this responsibility of deciding a court case as the jury. The fate of the accused is in their hands. The twelve jurors who hold this power show their contradicting opinions and personalities early on, and are influential to the decision. In the beginning, the jury seems to have agreed that the boy is guilty, but Juror #8 stands alone in the 11 to 1 vote. He digs deeper into the evidence, bringing up points that prove possible innocence. This forces the jury to spend more time on …show more content…
The killing was seen at 12:10 but the police caught the boy at his house around 3:00 in the morning, which is when he said he returned home from the movies in his alibi. If the boy did kill his father, why would he come back to the crime scene risking getting caught? The jurors ponder over this question, some making up possible reasons for returning and others turning it through their minds to sort all the evidence out. This point of reason shakes the case, and brings up some possible doubt in the jurors’ minds. Another reason why the alibi could be credible is because even though the boy didn’t remember things about the movies he had just seen, he was being harassed, and even people in a state of calmness can forget details like that. This is proved when Juror #8 asks Juror #4 questions about the past week. Juror #4 remembers certain movies he went to see earlier in the week, but even he can’t remember all of the details. Through this, Juror #8 proves that the evidence of the boy not remembering the exact details of the movies should not to be counted against him as it is insufficient