Juror #1 is the Foreman of the jury. He is serious about his role and tries to run the proceedings in an orderly fashion, reminding the jurors “Just let’s remember we’ve got a first degree murder charge here. If we vote guilty, we send the accused to the electric chair.” Juror #2 is timid, quiet and unsure of himself, finding it hard to maintain an independent opinion until he finds the courage to point out an important question about how the murder was actually committed. Juror #3 is the antagonist. He is a forceful, intolerant bully who sees the case as simple and believes the accused is absolutely guilty.
The accused is a young 19 year old boy, and the victim is the young boy’s father. When the jurors enter the Jury Room, they all think this case is open and shut – until they take the initial vote, and discover one man voted in favor of not-guilty. All the other jurors seem to think that all the evidence is laid out for them, while Juror Eight is not so sure. Juror Eight reviews all the evidence and is able to find many ways in which reasonable doubt was established. Specifically, in the testimony of the old woman, through the weapon that was used to murder the father, and finally through the testimony of the old man.
Jersey Shore Salary Big hair poofs, fake tans, a couple of big egos, and no respect, welcome to the Jersey Shore house. While the rest of America is out working hard to earn their money to afford the necessities, there are some people who think that paying millions of dollars to eight people who do nothing but set a bad example seems to be a smart idea. Anyone with cable television can watch MTV and their reality show Jersey Shore. Sami Sweetheart, Nicole, Mike, Pauly, Ronnie, Vinny, Jenni, and Dena are the members of this show. While Jersey shore may be an entertaining show, they are overpaid to just party and being bad influences.
Admission Ticket 4 Twelve Angry Men From the movie, it was seen that the power of the testimonies given by the eyewitnesses was huge to the juries and it was suggested that a ‘vivid eyewitness account is difficult to erase from juror’s minds ( Leippe,1985) and hence more likely to result in a conviction (Visher,1987). Therefore the jurors should take the misinformation effect into account. For example, a witness heard the boy shouted “I’m going to kill ya” few hours before the father was killed, may lead the witness assumed the boy was the murderer. And also the woman who claimed to see the murder while juror #8 tried to query her reliability of not wearing any visual aids at that time. Although juror #8 was the only one who voted “not guilty” in the open ballot of the earlier scene, he was as Myers (2010) explained that a minority was most persuasive when their arguments were “consistent, persistent and self-confident”.
The film “Twelve Angry Men” is a very interesting and captivating one. This film features twelve jurors who are middle-aged men. A young boy is on trial for the murder of his father and these jurors are faced with the responsibility of deciding whether or not he is guilty. However, the room that they deliberate in is very uncomfortable and hot. As they deliberate they are weighing the facts to ensure that they come up with a unanimous decision.
Savannah Stephens English Honors Juror Seven Twelve angry men is a drama about a sixteen year old boy who allegedly killed his father. When the only people deciding your fate are complete strangers you hope that they take a second look at what the facts are. Juror VII stands out, with barely a background, rude actions, and a confidence that he’s never going to be persuaded. Slicks, self-centered, jerk who is a salesman who wants to be anywhere but in this juror meeting. He talks about how he made a fortune selling marmalade (Pg.).
The most important fact about Hal is that he is not a genius. In fact, he shows this a little when he claims that if he had one tenth of the accomplishments Robert had, he could work in any math department in the country. He may enjoy less than a tenth of Robert’s ability, but he suffers nothing of his curse. He shows us this while he is with his rock band in the after-hours of the night. Hal and his friends go out for drinks and get laid, showing basic forms of sanity among most people.
In The Lottery, the younger generations of the town's population have begun to speak out against the annual stoning (Jackson). These youths cite the fact that many neighboring towns have already done away with the lottery, and they feel as though they too should dispense with the antiquated ritual. These youths represent the mirror image of the groups who opposed Hitler's regime in Nazi Germany. Also in the story is an elderly male character who reprimands the youths for their idealism and departure from norms and traditions (Jackson). He is more comfortable and content to keep with the ritual of stoning an innocent town's person to death every year.
Although unsupported at the beginning, he is devoted to justice, and is initially sympathetic toward the 19-year-old defendant. Despite the initial lack of moral support from the fellow members of the jury, throughout the duration of the play Juror 8 reels his fellow jurors in. Rallying encouragement of his opinion, Juror 8 eventually leads the entire jury to acquit the defendant of all conviction. Through the development of Juror 8’s
Folley, Smith, and Christensen developed the contracts for the executives of Rentall and other investors, and the sale was made. Being a perfectionist, it was only a matter of time until Bob was marching down to the Rentall headquarters, telling everyone the mistakes that Rentall was making and how to solve some of their problems. Pete Rosen, president of Rentall, became extremely angry about Bob’s constant interference, and in a brief 10-minute meeting, Pete told Bob never to enter the Rentall offices again. It was at this time that Bob and his lawyer discovered that there was no clause in the contracts that prevented Bob from competing directly with Rentall. The brief 10-minute meeting with Pete Rosen was the beginning of