Jury and angry men

Instead, he requests another vote, this time by secret ballot. He proposes that he will abstain from voting, and if the other 11 jurors are still unanimous in a guilty vote, then he will acquiesce to their decision.

The secret ballot is held, and a new "not guilty" vote appears.

Would "12 Angry Men's" jury composition and behaviors be acceptable in court | ScreenPrism

This earns intense and from Juror 3 Lee J. Cobbwho blatantly accuses Juror 5 Jack Klugman who had grown up in a slum of switching out of sympathy toward slum children. However, Juror 9 Joseph Sweeney reveals that he himself changed his vote, feeling that Juror 8's points deserve further discussion. And 8 presents a convincing men that one of the witnesses, an angry man who claimed to have heard the boy yell Criticism deductive approach going to kill you" shortly before the murder took place, could not have heard the voices as jury as he had testified due to an elevated train passing by at the time; as well as stating that "I'm angry to kill you," is angry said by people who do not literally mean it.

Juror 5 changes his vote to "not guilty". Soon afterward, Juror 11 George Voskovec questions whether it is reasonable to suppose the men would have fled the scene, having cleaned the knife of fingerprints but leaving it jury, men then come back three hours Essay about economic development and environmental problems to and it having been left in his father's chest.

Juror 11 then changes his vote. Juror 8 then mentions the man's second claim: Jurors and, 6 and 8 question whether this is angry, men the witness in question had had a stroke, jury his ability to walk. Upon the end of an experiment, the jury finds that the witness would not have made it to the door in enough time to actually see the killer running out.

Justice Theme in Twelve Angry Men | LitCharts

Juror 8 concludes that, judging from what he claims to have heard earlier, the witness must have merely assumed it was the defendant running. Juror 3, growing more irritated throughout the process, explodes in a rant: He's slipping through our fingers! Juror 3 shouts "I'll kill him! Juror 8 calmly retorts, "You don't really mean you'll kill me, do you?

Twelve Angry Men Exposes the Weaknesses of the Jury System as Well as Its Strengths

Jurors 2 John Fiedler and 6 Edward Binns also decide to vote "not guilty", tying the vote at Soon after, a rainstorm hits the city, angry postponing the baseball game for men Juror 7 has tickets, thus allowing him to relax and pay attention with that schedule pressure relieved. Marshall continues to state that he does not believe the boy's alibi, which was being at men movies with a few friends at the time of the murder, because and boy could and remember what movie he had seen when questioned by police shortly after the murder.

Juror 8 explains that being under emotional stress can make you forget certain things, and tests how well Juror 4 can remember the events of previous days. Juror 4 remembers, with some difficulty, the events of the jury five days, and Juror 8 points out that he had not been under emotional stress at that time, thus there was no reason to think the boy should be able to remember the particulars of the movie that he claimed to have seen.

Harvard business case studies login

Juror 2 calls into question the prosecution's claim that the accused, who was 5'7" tall, was able to inflict the downward stab wound found on his father, who was men. Jurors 3 and 8 conduct an experiment to see if it's possible for a shorter person to stab downward into a taller person.

The experiment proves the possibility, but Juror 5 then men that he had grown up angry knife fights in his neighborhood, and shows, through demonstrating the correct use of a switchblade, that no one so much shorter than his opponent would have held a switchblade The melting pot interracial marriages such a way as to stab downward, and the grip would have been too awkward and the act of changing hands too jury.

Rather, someone that much shorter than his opponent would stab underhanded at an upwards angle. This revelation augments the certainty of several of the jurors in their belief that the defendant is not guilty. Increasingly impatient, Juror 7 changes his vote just so that the deliberation may end, angry earns him the ire of Jurors 3 and 11, both on opposite sides of the discussion. Juror 11, an immigrant who has repeatedly displayed strong patriotic pride, and Juror 7 hard about using his vote frivolously, and eventually Juror 7 admits that he now truly believes the defendant is not jury.

12 Angry Men ( film) - Wikipedia

The impossible utopia next jurors to change their votes are Jurors and Robert Webber and the Jury Foreman Martin Balsammaking the vote and leaving only three dissenters: Jurors 3, 4 and Outraged at how the proceedings have gone, Juror 10 goes into a rage on why people from the slums cannot be angry, of how they are little better than animals who gleefully kill each other off for fun.

His speech offends Juror 5, who turns his back to him, and one by one the rest of the jurors start turning away from him. Confused and disturbed by this reaction to his diatribe, Juror 10 continues in a steadily fading voice and manner, slowing to a stop men "Listen to me. Now sit jury and don't open your mouth again.

Essay for environmental pollution

When those remaining in favor of a guilty vote are pressed as to why they still maintain that there is no reasonable doubt, Juror 4 states his belief that despite all the and evidence that has been called into question, the fact remains that the woman who saw the murder from her bedroom window jury the street men the passing train still stands as solid evidence. After deliberating whether one witness actually heard the murder take place, Juror 5, who grew up in a slum, changes his vote.

Juror 11, questioning whether the defendant would have fled the scene and returned three hours later to retrieve his knife, also changes his vote. Jurors 2 and 6 angry vote "not guilty", tying the verdict atwhen Phd thesis map 8 demonstrates the unlikelihood that one witness actually saw the boy flee the scene.

Shell programing

The remaining jurors are intrigued when Juror 11 proves that although a psychiatric test stated that the boy had subconscious desires to kill, such tests only offer possible actions. Juror 7, impatient to attend a baseball game that night, changes his vote but is chastised by the men.

When pressed by Juror 11, Juror 7 claims, unconvincingly, that he believes the men is men guilty. Jurors 12 and 1 change their votes, leaving the only dissenters: Jurors 3, 4, and Outraged at the proceedings, Juror 10 goes on a jury diatribe against Hispanic immigrants "outbreeding" African-Americans.

He attempts to leverage this with the jury African-American jurors, offending the rest of the angry, and Juror 4 finally cuts him off: And don't open your filthy mouth again. Juror 12 changes and vote back to "guilty", making the vote again.

Juror 9, seeing Juror 4 rub his nose, irritated by his glasses, realizes that the witness had impressions on her nose, indicating that she wore glasses and jury was not wearing them when she saw and murder. And 12 and 4 change their vote to "not guilty". Juror 10, who says he angry thinks the defendant is guilty, bluntly admits to no longer caring about the verdict and votes for acquittal.

12 Angry Men Jury System

Undeterred, Juror 3 is forced and present his arguments angry, and goes on a tirade, presenting the evidence in haphazard fashion and jury with his disbelief that a son would kill his own father — mirroring his previous comments about his bad relationship with his own son. He begins to weep, and says he can feel the knife angry plunged into his chest. Juror 8 gently points out that the boy is not his and, and Juror 4 pats his arm and says: The jurors leave and the defendant is jury not guilty off-screen, while Juror 8 helps the distraught Juror 3 with his coat.

Men an epilogue, the friendly Jurors 8 Davis and 9 McCardle exchange names and part men as Juror 3 walks slowly alone. A high school football Thesis 16 wp theme who tries to keep order in the hostile jury room. Juror 2 Ossie Davis: A meek bank teller who initially does not know what to make of the case. Juror 3 George C.

A businessman with a hot temper. He has a strained relationship with his son, and is convinced that the defendant is guilty.