Whilst Rose suggests that the judicial system has its imperfections, he also endorses the benefits he claims are invaluable to society. Initially, as the jurors respond to the task of judging the guilt or innocence of the 16 year old boy, charged with first degree murder of his father, shortcomings are flagrantly obvious. However, owing to the integrity and perspicacity of the 8th 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 only empowers individuals to engage in the judicial process, but acts as the basis for a just verdict which reflects a decent, caring democratic society; diversity may hinder, but in this case it can facilitate also justice.
At stake is the fate of a year-old boy who is on trial for the murder of his father. As the discussion unfolds, many difficulties emerge among the 12 jurors whose various experiences and backgrounds as well as their varied life narratives fuel tension.
It is not irrelevant either, that Rose sets the play in the heady period of the s — a period of post-war migration and racial segregation in the United States.
Typically, the jurors, who are all white males of around middle age, are not representative of the broader community, and many are hostile towards the young boy.
Rose implies that the defendant comes from a minority ethnic group, perhaps black or Hispanic and because of his dysfunctional socio-economic background, many believe that he is capable of murder. The critical role of the 8th juror Rose characterises the 8th juror as a spokesperson for justice who foregrounds the concept of reasonable doubt.
This seemingly honest and simply request fuels a great deal of dramatic tension among the jurors, many of whom are predisposed to conflicting views.
The 8th juror believes that the boy has the right to a fair trial, even though he comes from a deprived and possibly violent background. He shows a more forgiving, compassionate and sympathetic attitude to the young boy.
He points out that the boy has had a miserable life and does not automatically dismiss the boy or become angry towards him just because of his poverty-stricken circumstances and his dysfunctional family.
The jury of twelve angry men, entrusted with the power to send an uneducated, teenaged Puerto Rican, tenement-dwelling boy to the electric chair for killing his father with a switchblade knife, are literally locked into a small, claustrophobic rectangular room on a stifling hot summer day until they. 12 Angry Men Influence Analysis In the movie 12 Angry Men, you will find the power of influence and the effect it can have over a majority audience. Juror #8 who plays the protagonist role, is the only juror that votes not guilty in the initial round of deliberations. Analysis of the Jurors in 12 Angry Men Essay - In all criminal cases presented in the courts of the United States, a defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The law requires the jury to release the defendant unless it is fully convinced of the defendant's guilt.
In other words, the jurors should presume that the defendant is innocent until proven guilty. The 8th juror reminds the jurors that the onus is on the prosecution to prove guilt — not the defendant.
Specifically, the 8th juror points out that the old man and woman assumed it was the boy; the old man could not have heard the boy yell over the sound of the elevated train or hurried to his front door in 15 seconds because of his injured leg.
Think about the number system to identify the jurors. In a sense this depersonalises the jury members to show that their personalities should not play a factor. Ironically, the 8th juror seems to be the only one who, at first, best abides by this nameless system and focuses on the boy.
The 6th juror who is a house painter has had experience of apartments that overlook an el line and can testify to the noise. This is a quiet, frightened, insignificant old man who has been nothing all his life, who has never had recognition…. He concludes that the old man manipulated the evidence because he sought attention.
Likewise, the woman in the apartment opposite testifies to the fact that she looked through the window of the EL train and saw the boy stabbing his father. However, it becomes evident that the woman has deep indent marks on her nose from her eyeglasses.
It is most likely, then, that she would have had blurred vision, and possibly made a mistake. Evidently, the woman tried to make herself look young and attractive because she was on show during the trial.
Also the prosecution team deliberately asked her to remove the eyeglasses so as not to draw attention to her poor eyesight. The 8th juror also states that just because the boy cannot remember the details of the movie does not automatically disprove his alibi or his guilt.
He may be emotionally upset. Evidently, as Rose points out, the personalities of those who present the evidence play a large role. The eye-witnesses manipulate and distort the facts to confirm their personal views.
The role of prejudice Owing to preconceived biases, jurors are too quick to arrive at hasty conclusions and automatically accept the evidence that is presented before them. The 3rd and 10th jurors are typical of those who discriminate against the boy from the start of the trial by virtue of his poverty-stricken background and dysfunctional upbringing.
The Guard unlocks the door at the end suggesting the release of their bigoted ideas. Save us a lot of time and money. The most bigoted jurors 3rd and 10th are the last to concede defeat because of their deeply held convictions. Legal responsibilities Many jurors misunderstand or fail to apply their legal responsibilities.
The game of tic tac toe played by jurors 3rd and 12 reflects a disrespectful attitude toward their legal responsibilities. The 12th juror also changes his votes.
There is an obvious discrepancy between the articulate nature of the prosecution team and the inefficiency of the defence team. I was very impressed.- In the film 12 Angry Men, a group of twelve jurors are deciding the fate of a young boy accused of murdering his father.
Throughout the juries dilleration, one man exhibits all of the qualities of leadership.
This man is juror number 8 played by Henry Fonda. Oct 19, · Twelve Angry Men Essays (Examples) The jury in Twelve Angry Men is not diverse in terms of ethnicity and gender, because it consists of twelve white males.
that the jewels and the life she coveted so long ago was a sham. Hence, the symbolic nature of the necklace itself -- although it appears to have great value, it is in . "12 Angry Men" is a remake of the Black-and-white film, and tells the story of twelve jurors bound by the acceptance of their civic duty and thrust together into a hot, humid room to determine the guilt or innocence of a boy accused of killing his father in a moment of rage.
12 Angry Men study guide contains a biography of Reginald Rose, literature essays, quiz questions, major themes, characters, and a full summary and analysis.
The Foreman is responsible for keeping the jury organized, which is his main focus in the play. He is an assistant football coach outside of the jury room. Essays for 12 Angry Men.
One of such films that distort the realm of the United States criminal justice is 12 Angry Men. In the light of this view, this essay discusses how the film distorts the nature of the criminal justice system that the perception that the film imposes on the public concerning the nature of the criminal justice system.
Essay on Film Techniques in 12 Angry Men Words | 4 Pages. Film Techniques in Twelve Angry Men 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.