Jury and Angriest Juror Essay
Jury and Angriest Juror
Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose explored the theme ‘Power of persuasion’ through jurors’ # Three, Eight, and Nine. The play is inspired by Reginald Rose’s own experience of jury duty on a manslaughter case in New York City. Reginald Rose was born in New York City on December 10, 1920 and he worked at a series of odd jobs, including a receiving clerk, window cleaner, and camp counselor He served in the U.S. Army in World War II, completing his tour of duty first lieutenant, he had been reluctant to serve on a jury, he wrote “the moment I walked into the court room…and found myself facing a strange man whose fate was suddenly more or less in my hands, my entire attitude changed.” (Twelve Angry Men, Pg.288,378). Juror #Eight is such a great man to turn someone’s life upside down and make him survive such a horrible penalty such as death penalty which no one’s get a chance to correct his mistakes no more, or even regret it, because it just ends the life of that person forever.
And all it takes is an approval from the Jurors and the judge and then the case would be kind of closed and then he would be died that kid will owe Juror #Eight for the rest of his life for giving him a new life, While Juror #Eight is getting criticized by Jurors #Three, Sever, and Twelve but Juror #Eight says that he does not know whether the man is guilty or not but that it is not easy for him to send a boy to his death without discussing the facts of the case.(Twelve Angry Men,P.g290). And it was the right thing to do and just looking at the case from a three dimensional way and not being selfish and self-centered and just voting for guilty and sending that kid to death penalty and ending his life so easily. Juror #Eight Also insists that, “during the trial, too many questions were left unasked”. “He asks for the murder weapon to be brought in” and says that “it is possible that someone else stabbed the boy’s father with a similar knife.” (Twelve Angry Men p.g.290).
Juror #Eight was really smart when he replied to the angriest juror which was juror #Two and he says “According to the law, the defendant does not have to demonstrate his innocence. He is innocent until proved guilty. The second element is that the verdict must be unanimous, since unanimity guards against a miscarriage of justice. Third, the defendant can be convinced only in the absence of reasonable doubt on the part of the jury. If there is reasonable doubt, he must be acquitted.
The underlying principle is that it is better that a guilty man be set free than an innocent man be convinced.” (Twelve Angry Men, P.g379) It was a real hot day for the jurors inside that closed room and all they had is a fan, because back in that time they did not have air conditioners or any stronger coolers for the room and that stressed a lot of them out making them choose the easy path which is not thinking and just voting for guilty. The dynamics of group behavior simply do not work that way. In the 1950s, a study of 255 trials by the Chicago Jury Project turned up no examples of such an occurrence.
The study, in Which microphones were placed in the jury room to record deliberations, found that thirty percent of cases were decided, either for conviction or acquittal, on the first Ballot. In ninety five perfect of cases, the majority on the first ballot persuaded the minority to their point of view. In the other words, the way a jury first casts its vote preferences is the best predictor of the final verdict.
This conclusion has been confirmed by much research in jury behavior over the past half century which includes the play “Twelve Angry Men” (Twelve Angry Men, P.g299) Juror #Three is almost all the play in one mode that never changed it’s a horrible mode and he is also trying his best to throw stress on everybody he almost got angry at everybody too he got angry at Juror #Four just for saying the only word that he would never know what it really means it’s the word fair. After Juror #3 angrily says “What do you mean? There are no secrets in here! I know who it was. What’s the matter with you? You come in here and you vote guilty and then this slick preacher starts to tear your hear tout with stories about a poor little kid who just couldn’t help becoming a murderer. So you change your vote. If that isn’t the most sickening.”
Foreman stops him and says “Now hold it.” And Juror number four says “I agree with you that the man is guilty but let’s be fair.” (Twelve Angry Men, Act Two, P.g27) And that’s what made Juror #Three furious. Just hearing the word fair. Juror #Eight keeps getting angry but actually he does have his one and only excuse which is Juror #3 has a son.
University/College: University of California
Type of paper: Thesis/Dissertation Chapter
Date: 29 November 2016
Let us write you a custom essay sample on Jury and Angriest Juror
for only $16.38 $13.9/page