...Juror # 1: He is the foreman on this jury. He takes his role very seriously but is seen at times to lose control of the proceedings of the group of jury members that he is supposed to oversee. Juror # 2: He seems to be the most timid and nervous member of the jury. He is easily swayed by the opinion of others. Juror # 3: He is the most vociferous member of the jury. He has some very strong opinions which at times appear to not be backed by any logic. His character shows some signs of sadism ingrained in him. Juror # 4: He is a strong character who presents himself and his thoughts in a respectable manner at all times. He’s main concern is facts and he’s opinion is not swayed by any non-factual information about the case. Juror # 5: He has lived in slums for a large part of his life and appears to suffer from a sense of low esteem as a result, which becomes obvious at various parts of the proceedings. Juror # 6: He is a house painter who is happy to be a part of the jury as it means that he doesn’t have to work. He is accepting of views which differ from his own. Juror # 7: He portrays an air of indifference to the case. He’s main concern is whether the proceedings will end before the baseball match whose tickets he has bought, starts. Juror # 8: He is the only member who voted “not guilty” in the first voting. He’s main concern was that the trial was not handled in a proper manner by the defendants lawyer. He wanted to examine the evidence more thoroughly to see whether...
Words: 379 - Pages: 2
...Twelve Angry Men – Book Report How does your background and peer pressure influence your opinions and decisions? The play we read “twelve angry men” shows how a jury makes such an important decision of either sending the defendant to his death or keeping him alive – the jury determinates the fate of a 16 year old boy. As the title suggests that there are 12 men in the jury who do not know one another, and do not know the defendant, but these jurors have to work as one united group to argue and reach an agreement. They all have to be convinced wither the boy is guilty or not. The trial is about a sixteen year old boy accused with the murder of his father. The story has no plot because it tells us how these 12 jurors argue about the case in a small room and reach the final decision. They have to think as a group because, otherwise, it could not work, that means that they will get to the wrong decision, and cause or the release of a killer or the death of an innocent young man. The play emphasizes how they deal with the case and how they make a decision vital for the boy’s life. The jury is actually a group of randomly chosen members of society. Each one of them represents a particular class of the society, not only as a mass of people, but also the way this class of society thinks and behaves. Therefore, every one of them is sensitive to different issues and social norms and also each one of them confirms to different society standards and values of society. It is...
Words: 1913 - Pages: 8
...Jury in Danger. There were twelve people on the jury. Every one of them killed. No one knew who to blame, but they all suspected the prosecutor, Ash Mayfield. He had been accused of killing his wife, Jessica. The jury members were told to take their seats, as the bailiff announced that court was in session. Everyone had taken their seats while Mr Sultan called up his first witness. After about ten minutes or so, Mr Evans, Ash's lawyer, brought up his witnesses. It continued this way for about another hour or so and then it was time for everyone to go home. The judge announced that the very next day, the jury should have a verdict. When that day came, Mayfield was found not guilty. Five days later, the killings began. The twelve jury members from the Mayfield case were Karen, Linda, Diane, Martin, Louise, Tracey, Ben, Michael, Robert, Samantha, Simon, and John. If only they had known how miserable their lives were about to become. John was at a restaurant with his wife, Suzy. It was their first anniversary, and so they wanted to make it special. It was special alright, but for the worst. John and his wife were talking, when John had to go to the men's room. John was standing over the sink washing his hands. He suspected he was alone, but then out of nowhere someone came up from behind him and wrapped a rope tightly around his neck. He struggled and fought but his attacker was too strong. As John's face turned from pale to purple, he hit the ground...
Words: 839 - Pages: 4
...Members:- Amit Pandit Mittal Shah Ramachandran Ravi Kumar Saleem Ali Shaman Singh PLOT SUMMARY: In this movie, the jury of twelve men is entrusted with the power to send an uneducated, teenage boy to the Death Penalty. The crime that the boy is accused of is killing his father with a knife. The jury is locked into a small, claustrophobic room, on a hot summer day, until they come up with a unanimous decision. The decision that is to decide a boy’s life is to be either guilty or not guilty. The film is particularly important as it examines the twelve men's deep-seated personal prejudices. These are reflected in the perceptual biases and weaknesses, indifference, anger, personalities, unreliable judgments, cultural differences, ignorance and fears, that are in a position to mar their decision-making abilities, and subsequently cause them to ignore the real issues in the case. This can potentially lead them to a miscarriage of justice. What are the key learning for you as leaders? First and foremost, we learn that every decision should be based on reasonable evidence and it can be dangerous to rush to conclusions. In the movie, most of the Jury members were initially in a hurry to shut the case and pronounce the accused guilty even when they know it’s a matter of someone’s life. Only Mr. Raina stands against such a decision and demands that the jury should give appropriate time to the issue and have a healthy discussion on the entire case. Hence, as managers, we should...
Words: 3788 - Pages: 16
...how snap judgements were made that heavily influenced the case at hand, however throughout the course of the play we see that these prejudices were broken down. Arguments: 1. Prejudice displayed through the 3rd, 7th, 10th and 2nd jury members and their apparent lack of compassion and sympathy for a boy none of them know that is on trial for a murder case 2. How easily the other, quieter jury members where influenced by authority/ influential members of the jury team (juror 8, juror 3) 3. The American justice system in the 1950s to today’s views on punishment 4. The 1950s and how social/ political and economic choices all influenced the juror’s decisions in the murder case Title, author Context Contention However statement Twelve Angry Men, a play by Reginald Rose, unfolds within the archetypical and unceasing setting of a 20th Century American court room. The audience bear witness to the procession of a court case in which twelve jury members are set to delegate a murder case where the defendant is a young African American boy who is on trial for the alleged killing his father after a heated argument between the accused and the victim. The play’s theme of prejudice is heavily shown to be a prominent theme in which the majority of the jury members make hasty and potentially deadly decisions based on a pre-existing judgement based on the ill-conceived philosophies of that time period, and of what the America justice system should be for the white community and the black...
Words: 370 - Pages: 2
...dysfunctional properties of the 12-jury men play a big role in analysing and evaluating the main purpose at hand, namely identifying the young man guilty or innocent for the murder of his father. The different roles the 12-jury men play in the deliberation of the capital murder case is prominent. Firstly, a role can be defined as a set of expected behaviour patterns attributed to someone occupying a given position in a social unit. Different groups enforce different role requirements on individuals namely; role expectation, role perception and role conflict. (i) Role expectation: Role expectation can be defined as the role others believe a person should play or the way others believe a person should act in a given situation. When looking at the Jurors’ main role in any court system and in the film, it is expected of them to decide whether or not the defendant should be declared guilty or not guilty. (ii) Role perception: Role perception can be defined as the individual’s view of how he or she should act in a given situation. When looking at the film the Jurors individual frame of position and prejudices influence how they individually perceive the case. Because the Jurors perceptions are unique it leads to complications in the communication process. In the film “12 Angry men” Juror no. 3 decides beforehand that it is an “open and shut case”. He validates his verdict by using emotionally laden language which eventually influences and persuades the other jury members. “This kid’s a dangerous...
Words: 2018 - Pages: 9
...‘Twelve angry men’ shows that personal experience is the strongest factor influencing human decision-making processes.’ Discuss Twelve angry men by Reginald Rose is an intriguing play that explores the idea of personal experience affecting ones decision. Indeed Rose shows that decision-making is based on personal experiences. This is evident in the play when the 3rd Juror’s personal experience with his own son influences his decision and as a result he votes for guilty, the 9th Jurors old age becomes one of the greatest factors which influences his judgement of the boy ; when the 5th Jurors personal experience in a slum causes further doubts to form in his mind It is clear throughout the play that personal experience is a means of making the right decision. The 3rd Juror’s painful memory of his own son inspires his decision and as a result he votes for guilty. His son who left him when he had an argument similar to the one the defendant has with his father which causes him to assume that all teenagers are the same. His generalisation of teenagers as a whole and empathy dismisses the possibility that the boy may not be guilty. This is apparent when the 3rd juror says:” jeez, I can feel that knife goin’ in.”(Act 2 page 59) His anger for the boy grows as the play progresses and several times he makes reference to his own son. This is proven when he says:” when he was sixteen we had a battle…”(Act 1 page 12)Perhaps it is for this very reason that the 3rd Juror is so determined to...
Words: 363 - Pages: 2
...Ans 6. “Prejudice always complicated the truth.” The movie 12 Angry Men, by means of several situational examples, reaffirms the fact. The first case in point is of the boy on trial who is born and brought up in slums. Many of the jury members, especially jurors 10, 7, 4 and 3 are heavily influenced by the prejudices they hold against children from the slums. In one of the scenes, juror 10, goes into a rage and explains why people from the slums cannot be trusted and calls them little better than animals who gleefully kill each other off for fun. Juror 4 had earlier pointed out that slums are breeding grounds for criminals and that these slum children are a threat to our society to which 10 adds that they are “real trash”. This is where juror 5 who himself has been born and brought up in slums interrupts and reveals about himself to which others try and convince him that it isn’t about him and that he should not be taking it personally. Juror 11 makes a point at this juncture and empathizes with juror 5 saying that he can understand his sensitivity about the slum issue. It is to be noticed hear that this juror 11 is Hispanic origin and himself had been a victim of such treatment out of held prejudices. One such instance comes in one of the movie scenes as well when juror 7 makes a remark on juror 11 and says “they” are all alike who come running for a life and before you can take a deep breath they get on your head and calls him arrogant. Towards the end juror 10 again makes...
Words: 601 - Pages: 3
...Jury Nullification In the American criminal justice system, the jury plays a significant role in the fate of a defendant who is on trial. The jury’s role is to evaluate the facts presented by both the prosecution and the defense, and decide whether those facts are substantial enough to convict, or not to convict, a person of the crime for which they are accused. This has been a cornerstone of American justice since before the country’s birth. The right of a trial by a jury of peers is an inalienable right guaranteed to everyone, and is protected by the Constitution. The rights of a jury are also inherent. A jury has a right to nullify, or disregard, the instructions of a court and the facts of a case in coming to a decision. Oftentimes, however, juries are intentionally not informed of this right. Many critics of jury nullification claim that its excercise and application leads to a lawless society (Scheflin, Van Dyke, 1991: 424). California’s jury instructions state that the jury must perform their duty uninfluenced by pity or sentiment for a defendant or passion or prejudice against them, while Maryland’s jury instructions state that while the facts about what the law says are meant to be helpful they may disregard them as they see fit (Bonsignore, et al:428). The practice of jury nullification in the United States dates back to the colonial period of our nation. In 1735, John Peter Zenger was arrested by the British government and charged...
Words: 820 - Pages: 4
...| | Author : Vijay Krishna Bojja Pankaj Kapur – Juror 3 – 9,1 leadership Pankaj Kapur played a role of a Juror 3, who has a son around the same age as the convict and his son ran away from home punching him in the face. His wife is dead worrying about the son. He is living alone hoping for his son’s arrival. In the act we clearly see that, he is intolerant of others’ opinions, slightly sadistic, pessimistic, and short-tempered stubborn, Hateful and hostile to young people (may be attitude resulted out of his son’s bad conduct). He is strong oriented with his opinions. He thinks he is right all the time. As facilitators, we believe he is a sure 9, 1 demonstration with a least concern to the people and as we could also see because of his attitude towards the young people he is highly task focused to punish the convicted by pulling in people towards the task. And he always insisted on favorable facts and does not bother about other’s opinions and relationship with them. He likes and forms groups with the people who supports him and fights the rest. He only considers and listens to high performers and neglects and puts down the mediocre. He is very angry with the people, who talks against his decision. He glares at the people who talks against and vote against his decision. He shouts and yells at others to prove his point. If he finds himself losing control, he attacks physically, verbally to put down others and win over others. He influenced people with his aggression...
Words: 1762 - Pages: 8
...Defiance Of course, one of the famous, attractive and effective movies, which illustrate jury trial system in the US, is Twelve Angry Men (1957). American Film Institute revealed that the movie was the second best film in the Court Drama genre (AFL’s 10 Top 10). Exploration of this film, when jury trial does not happen in Islamic Court, deeply influenced the concepts such as the true judgment and justice in my mind as a Muslim. This paper is aimed to discuss and analysis several instances of defiance behaviors, which are displayed in the movie. It also considers strategies groups utilize to extinguish defiance in each instances of defiance. The first scene; all jurors sat around the table exception for the foreman who concerned to keep formal procedure in the group. He mentioned if all jurors get a unanimous verdict, the defendant would charge mandatory death sentence. He started to count the votes “guilty”, while jurors were raising their hands. Juror number 1, 3, 4, 7, 10 and 12 quickly put up their hands but jurors 2, 5, 6, 11 and 9 raised with slightly pause. Juror number 8 was the only person who believed the boy is not guilty and he had not been conceived to put someone into a death sentence:”It's not easy to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first...We're talking about somebody's life here. We cannot decide in five minutes.” Certainly, it would be hard to become alone against the group. The juror number 8 is the first...
Words: 1304 - Pages: 6
... when it comes to the case of people who have a certain fame, things become more complicated. Often, the trials are postponed and the time it takes for juries and judges make a decision becomes longer. As a result, the defendant who is a celebrity or a political figure avoids some of his charges. Robert Kelly, Rod Blagojevich and Orenthal James ("O.J.") Simpson are...
Words: 2129 - Pages: 9
...In Reginald Rose’s play Twelve Angry Men, juror four only allows factual evidence influence his views on the case. The play depicts a case where a jury of twelve men has to decide if a boy is guilty or not guilty of killing his father. They are presented with evidence and testimonies and are set aside in a room to interpret the information. If they vote guilty, he will be executed and if they vote not guilty he will be set free. Although all three modes play part in changing the the fourth juror’s mind, logos is most important because his decision to “let him live” (Rose 72) is guided by concrete evidence and examples, and not emotions or biases. The fourth juror’s ethos helps keep order in the jury room, keeping everyone on track and educated about the facts of the case, and his sense of verity informs his final decision. The fourth juror is a stockbroker, which requires using deep analyzation to make decisions. This aspect of his character is why he is the only juror who bases his decision solely on...
Words: 658 - Pages: 3
...social backgrounds and individual values. The movie demonstrates how an “Unstructured Group”, prominently displaying Laissez-faire transactional leadership, transforms into a “High Performing Team”. Davis (Juror #8), the character played by Henry Fonda, is instrumental in influencing this transformation. Davis demonstrates how one man can motivate and inspire a group, align them towards exploring the possibility that other explanations of the events exist and allow them to feel confident in performing the job they are entrusted with. A transformational leader is often charismatic, inspirational, and has the courage to challenge the status quo. Davis displays many transformational leadership qualities ultimately leading the rest of the jury to question their original assumptions, to consider that another life is at stake. In this highly emotional situation, Davis uses his ability to influence the other jurors to explore deeper within them, and to open up their minds. Davis first demonstrates Idealized Influence, “in which a leader can be counted on to do the right thing, demonstrating high standards of ethical and moral conduct” (Bass & Riggio, 2006), very early in the movie when he casts the only not guilty vote in a show of hands. Four of the jurors reluctantly raise their...
Words: 1631 - Pages: 7
...show strong prejudice against the accused purely as he is from the slums and claim that he is guilty on this point alone, whereas juror five is more reluctant to think badly of the boy as he also grew up in the slums. Many of the juror’s prejudices against people from the slums make juror five too nervous to initially speak or express his opinion and his opinion is not taken as seriously because he is seen to be just trying to defend the accused as they both grew up in the slums. Many of the jurors also do not take juror nine seriously and do not believe he will have any valuable points to make purely because he is an elderly man. Conflict is started when juror seven changes his vote. As he originally stated that he wanted to get out of the jury as soon as possible to watch the ball game the other jurors have the preconception that anything he does will be a strategic move so that he can leave, rather than doing what is best for the case. Throughout the play juror three makes comments about his son and towards the end it becomes clear that he was being prejudiced towards the accused purely because it reminded him of his son, who he does not get along with. Most of the jurors are prejudiced towards the accused based on the fact that he has grown up in the slums, some prejudices favourable and others not so favourable. Jurors three, four and ten are very rigid minded about people that grew up in the slums, thinking they are all “potential menaces to society”, as stated by juror...
Words: 1349 - Pages: 6
