Juror #2 was a very frantic and nervous type of guy. In the beginning he voted the boy guilty, but by the end of the film his reasonable doubt had him opposed to that previous notion. Juror #3 was the assumed “antagonist” which fits his character very well. He was all for the young boy’s execution the whole time until he glanced at a picture that held some type of symbolism to him when he finally broke down and voted innocent. Juror #4 the Wall Street guy was very analytical about his vote.
Davis the name of number 8 juror tried to convince the members of the jury and he succeed to change their minds. Davis was smart and logically man, he started doubt the evidence by the switch knife. The jurors believed the knife belongs to the eighteen years old guy and he stabbed it in his father chest, Davis made his argument by said might the murder used another knife looked like the guy’s knife and he showed the jurors a knife looked like the knife was used to kill the man. After this argument the one of jurors #9 changed his vote to not guilty. After that #5 juror who had a problem to express his opinion, he changed his mind and vote for not guilty.
Inductive or Deductive Reasoning Name:Inductive Instructor’s Name: Wilson University: john Tyler Date: 4/11/2014 Inductive Reasoning: A Case of Twelve Angry Men Twelve Angry Men is a movie that out rightly uses inductive reasoning to judge whether or not a Puerto Rican boy is guilty or not of killing his father with a switch blade. The judge in this case gave instructions to the jury to treat the case as a pre-meditated murder which deserved a mandatory death sentence. Just like any other lawful cases, the judge emphasized on the fact that the boy is innocent until proven guilty. The aspect of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ forms the basis for argument in the Twelve Angry Men. While in the jury room a vote was conducted to determine what people thought of the boy –guilty or not guilty.
12 Angry Men persuaded by rhetoric In the movie 12 angry men rhetoric is found throughout the movies as the jurors argue amongst one another as to whether or not a teenage boy is guilty of stabbing his father. As they dig deeper into the case and examine evidence closer the jurors use all three forms of rhetoric, ethos, pathos, and logo’s in order to decide the boys fait. When the jurors first take a preliminary vote it is found that juror number 8 is the only one who votes not guilty. When questioned by the other 11, he reveals to them that he couldn’t possibly vote guilty without first discussing the case, because the guilty verdict would mean the death of teenage boy. This is a great example of the use of the rhetoric, ethos’s because he is basing his decision of not guilty, off of principles and morals rather than evidence shown, and wants to first discuss and way all the evidence of the case, rather than just making a quick decision because it seems that the logical answer would be guilty.
1) Analyze how the jurors’ personality traits influenced the group decision process. In so doing, identify the most critical moments which can support your argument. Moreover, identify the main roles within the jury, and describe possible correlations between jurors’ personality traits and such roles In the 1957 classic film “12 Angry Men”, group dynamics are portrayed through a jury deliberation. On “the hottest day of the year, without air-condition”, 12 jurors have the duty to decide whether a young boy from the slums murdered his father and should be executed. To render a verdict, they must unanimously vote that the boy did or did not kill his father beyond all reasonable doubt.
12 Angry Men 12 Angry Men Tia Pierce Benedictine University The film 12 Angry Men was not only entertaining but it illustrates many social psychology concepts. The film features a group of twelve jurors who must decide the guilt or innocence of man accused of murdering his own father. Initially eleven of the twelve jurors were set on a guilty vote. Lead by one jurors attempt to convince the others that guilty beyond reasonable doubt had not been proven and that a not guilty verdict might be appropriate and through tense and sometimes heated discussions, gradually, each juror changed their vote to not guilty. The twelve jurors in this film make up a Group.
12 Angry Men Response The 1957 film, “12 Angry Men,” directed by Sidney Lumet tells the story of twelve jurors who are chosen to sit in on an eighteen year old boy’s trial. These men must decide whether or not the boy is guilty or not of stabbing his father in the chest and killing him. They have the boy’s life in their hands and need to come up with a verdict of either to send him to the chair or let him free. Throughout the movie they take various votes, the first one had the count of 11-1 with guilty being the dominant choice. Juror 8, played by Henry Fonda, was an architect named Davis and the only one to vote towards not guilty.
Twelve Angry Men is a film that chronicles the deliberation process of a jury in the decision of a murder case. The jury, while comprised of twelve men, depicts men from all walks of life—from a seemingly affluent architect to a man who has lived in slums all his life. As such, the issue of diversity seems to be the driving source behind the conflict of the film. In the beginning of the film, Mr. Davis (Henry Fonda, Juror #8) finds himself the sole juror who believes the accused is possibly wrongly accused of the crime. All other eleven men are certain that the boy is guilty.
The film “12 Angry Men” (1957) is based on the story of twelve jurors who are responsible for deliberating and deciding the fate of a teenage boy accused of murdering his father. Although to most it seems like an open and shut case where the boy is definitely guilty, one juror speaks out against the popular groupthink of the other eleven jurors and admits that although he does not know if the boy is guilty, he is not convinced that he is. Throughout the film this one juror, played by Henry Fonda, speaks his mind in a very non-confrontational way, and begins to sway the jury vote by vote. By the end of the film the jury has reached a consensus of “not guilty”. Power is described in our text as “the ability to influence, command, or apply force; a measure of a person’s potential to get other to do what he or she wants them to do, as well as to avoid being forced by others to do what he or she does not want to do”.
12 Angry Men Topic (Groupthink) that helps an individual understands the movie, 12 Angry Men. “12 Angry Men”, is a movie about 12 jurors who get stuck in a room to debate if a person charged of murder is guilty or not guilty. The case seemed to look like a one sided case, but little did they know one guy would vote differently. The 11 men actually lost to one man, and it caused emotions from the beginning to the end of the movie. This movie was all about non-ethical and lazy like sayings, such as: “lets get it over quick” and “who really cares”.