Initially his voice of reason implores to the conscience of the reader to “deliberate honestly and thoughtfully”. Although the foreman is perceived as speaking to the jury here, Rose writes in such a way that his words are also directed at the audience. This can be deduced from the foreman’s appeals that if “there is any reasonable doubt” a “verdict of not guilty” must be brought forth. Leading this charge is Juror 8. Although unsupported at the beginning, he is devoted to justice, and is initially sympathetic toward the 19-year-old defendant.
The old man who first changed his vote acknowledged this admirable transformational leadership quality when he commented: “it is not easy to stand alone against the ridicule of others. He gambled for support and I gave it to him”. A transformational leader is a role model: • He powerfully modeled having a thoughtful, investigative and inquiring mind to the rest of the jury members by re-examining the key evidences of the prosecutor and the 2 witnesses. Other members of the jury soon followed his example and started raising “reasonable doubts” which led to a unanimous “Not guilty” verdict. • He Frequently reinforces that the burden of proof is on the prosecution and that if there is reasonable doubt, then they should acquit the kid • This character has a very clear idea of what the goal is here.
The film presents the story so that Juror 8 would have to persuade the rest of the jurors to choose not guilty. But I believe what happened in the room is that each of the jurors persuaded each other but it was through Juror 8 that they were able to exercise their critical thinking skills. The jury was convinced that the defendant was guilty based on solid evidence that was resented. They took the case at face value and did not bother to question the time frame and events that happened were plausible. The other jurors neglected the details in the story and that is what made Juror 8 stand out from the rest.
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.
Each of the others is eventually compelled to change his mind at least once (12 juror changes his mind 3 times), usually thanks to an argument posited by 8th. Yet while he is firm in his position, he is not inflexible. Rather, he regularly and openly admits to his own uncertainties, frequently answering others' questions with an honest 'I don't know'; by not hiding his vulnerability he ultimately wins over the entire jury. Similarly, when he first justifies his vote of 'not guilty', he states ' I haven't got anything brilliant. I only know as much as you do' (p.13).
He starts to listen to the contradictions of the evidence the court and what lawyers came up with, he also took all of the evidence that Juror VIII had proved in the juror room. He sees that the other juror’s reasons for voting “Not guilty” actually makes sense. He just didn’t want to show them that he was wrong and they were right. After a while he grows tired of their arguments and how the right “not guilty” side is. He starts to agree and when he’s asked why he changed his mind, he simply replied.
Judge Taylor ends up being very helpful towards Tom; no other white person besides Atticus would take the time to think about a black man. It’s hard to give Tom a fair chance when the whole jury’s skin color is white, and the whole town is against you, but Judge Taylor encourages Atticus to try his best. When the case ends its fair to say Judge wasn’t exactly happy with the outcome, partially because Tom has to go to jail to pay his time. Beyond his feelings, Judge Taylor continues to try his best to make people realize how innocent Tom really
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.
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.
HRMG 6200 / Section 6 August 26, 2012 Week 2 – Interpersonal Behavior Interpersonal Communications: “12 Angry Men” (1957) In the film 12 Angry Men a group of twelve white male jurors are tasked to provide a verdict of guilty or not guilty in a case judging an 18-year-old minority (Puerto Rican) boy of murdering his father. All 12 jurors come from a different walk of life and although all members are Caucasian, the group is extremely diverse. As a result, several personality conflicts emerge and highlight the many differences these twelve strangers have (cultural/value based/assumptions). These individual differences and previously formed biases play a major role in each juror’s opinion, which have an affect on the overall decision-making process and ultimately the final verdict of the jury. This analysis and study of group dynamics will concentrate on the importance of interpersonal as well as intergroup communication.