The other jurors look at Juror Eight coldly. Active Themes Juror Six adds that the witnesses from across the hall were convincing.
As the jury foreman, he is somewhat preoccupied with his duties, although helpful to accommodate others. Jurors 5, 6 and 8 question whether this is true, as the witness in question had had a stroke, limiting his ability to walk.
Juror 11 then changes his vote. Juror 12 then reverts his vote, making the vote 8—4. He is the only juror to change his vote more than once during deliberations, initially voting "guilty", and changing three times. Jurors 12 and 1 then change their votes, leaving only three dissenters: Juror Seven is defensive about how fast he voted.
Rather, someone that much shorter than his opponent would stab underhanded at an upwards angle.
He or she lays out the stakes: His vote annoys the other jurors, especially Juror 7 Jack Wardenwho has tickets to a baseball game that evening; and Juror 10 Ed Begley Sr. Increasingly impatient, Juror 7 changes his vote just so that the deliberation may end, which earns him the ire of Jurors 3 and 11, both on opposite sides of the discussion.
Juror 8 accuses him of being a sadist. Four, on the other hand, reacts negatively to these displays of emotion.
In this alternative adaptation of the play, Juror No. An angry Juror 3 accuses Juror 5, who grew up in a slum, of changing his vote out of sympathy towards slum children. Moreover, he is the first juror to show humanity throughout the play. He wants the kid to get a fair hearing in this jury room, for once in his life.
This revelation augments the certainty of several of the jurors in their belief that the defendant is not guilty. 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.
Four assumes that if the kid bought a switch knife that appears the same as the murder weapon, it must be the same knife. It is immediately apparent that the jurors have already decided that the boy is guilty, and that they plan to return their verdict without taking time for discussion with the sole exception of Juror 8who is the only "not guilty" vote in a preliminary tally.“Twelve Angry Men” – A Critical thinkers Argument analysis.
The search for truth, does the end justify the means? Introduction. The play and subsequent movie “Twelve Angry Men” is an examination of the dynamics at play in. 12 Angry Men is a American courtroom drama film adapted from a teleplay of the same name by Reginald Rose.
  Written and co-produced by Rose himself and directed by Sidney Lumet, this trial film tells the story of a jury made up of 12 men as they deliberate the conviction or acquittal of a defendant on the basis of reasonable doubt.
In 12 Angry Men, Juror 8 is such a person, calmly and patiently leading his fellow jurors to a unanimous verdict of not guilty in what seems like an uphill battle. Let's look at how he. "12 Angry Men" focuses on a jury's deliberations in a capital murder case.
A man jury is sent to begin deliberations in the first-degree murder trial of an year-old man accused in the stabbing death of his father, where.
The play 12 Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, introduces to the audience twelve members of a jury made up of contrasting men from various backgrounds. One of the most critical elements of the play is how the personalities and experiences of these men influence their initial majority vote of guilty.
Transcript of 12 Angry Men: Juror #8 Juror 8 Biography Juror 8's name is Davis and his occupation is an architect. It is obvious that he was very intelligent and has many years of experience in his job.Download