|
|
|
|
|
12 angry men
|
|
|
12 Angry Men Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law defines reasonable doubt as a doubt about the guilt of a criminal defendant that arises or remains upon fair and thorough consideration of the evidence or lack thereof all persons are presumed to be innocent and no person may be convicted of an offense unless each element of the offense is proved beyond a reasonable doubt. The jurors provide a mixture of different backgrounds and lifestyles. None of the jurors are named, and they don't formally introduce themselves to each other except for two of them in the final brief ending. Jurors are labeled with numbers based on their jury numbers and seats at a conference table in the jury room in clock-wise order, with juror number one at the head of the table acting as the foreman. Juror number one was a high-school assistant head coach. Due to his need for authority and need to keep the proceedings formal, he was often easily frustrated and sensitive when someone objected to his control or when juror number eight would start to overshadow him with his natural leadership and start to step in as the “new leader“. Some might say he was inadequate for the job as foreman because of his lack of natural leadership abilities, however he managed to stay the foreman and keep control throughout the deliberation. Juror number one is the ninth juror to change his vote from guilty to not guilty. Juror number two was a slightly wimpy, bank clerk who was easily persuaded, and at times very meek, and hesitant. He easily went along with the majority. After the initial vote when asked why he voted guilty he meekly and quite flustered struggled to put his opinions into words he finally came to say "I just think he's guilty. I thought it was obvious from the word 'go.' I mean, nobody proved otherwise” During an open ballot vote juror number two changes his vote to not guilty and at that time brought the vote to a tie. Juror number three ran a messenger service, he was a bullying, rude, loud-mouthed, husky man, who was extremely opinionated and biased. At times he was very temperamental and quite vengeful. He from the very beginning pushed for a guilty verdict. He was straight forward in his vote of guilty saying that "these are facts - you can't refute facts," “and the boy is definitely guilty.” Later in the deliberations when everyone but him had changed their votes he threatens the other jurors by saying "you lousy bunch of bleeding' hearts" "You're not going to intimidate me. I'm entitled to my opinion." After this he pulls out his wallet and a picture of his son falls to the table. Then he makes the comment “Rotten kids, you work your life out!” and then starts to break down and sob as he rips the picture and lays his head on the table still sobbing and changes his vote to not guilty, he is the last juror to change his vote. In this very emotional scene the estrangement from his own teenaged son is seen to be the reason that he is hateful and hostile toward all young people including the defendant.
|
|
|
|
Still Can't Find What Your Looking For? Then Try a Essay Search!
|
