Free Essays,College Free Essays,Free College Essays at Anti Essays

Juror #7 is impatient about what was Juror #8’s “reasonable doubt" opinion. In Act I (page18), he said he wouldn’t change his mind even Juror #8 talked for a hundred years. When (Act I Page20) the entire juror was discuss their vote, Juror #7 couldn’t explain why he votes for guilty. He shirks his responsibility to explain why; he just said the kid had bad record which is the reason he vote for guilty. At the beginning of Act 3, Juror #7 seems still very care about his face value (Act III Page38). Even there have lots of testimonies; he still insists that there is no room for the ‘reasonable doubt’ in the case. He was not only ignored all the evidences but also speak very rule to Juror #11 because of Juror #11 was question him about the ‘reasonable doubt’.When Juror #5 was defeated for Juror #11, Juror #7 said apologize to Juror #5.We can tell from his personality wise, Juror #7 is a quick tempered, irresponsible, and disgusting bully as well as coward. During the middle of Act III, after juror #5 points out the possible doubt how defendant couldn’t have handled the knife in the wrong way, juror #7 changes his vote to “not guilty” for all the wrong reason; he states that he changes his vote, only because he is ‘sick’ of the talking and bickering. After juror #11 (Act III page 40-41) calls out that he should only change his vote because he really believes that defendant it “Not guilty”.