Jury and Angriest Juror Essay

Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose explored the subject ‘Power of persuasion’ through jurors’ # Three. Eight. and Nine. The drama is inspired by Reginald Rose’s ain experience of jury responsibility on a manslaughter instance in New York City. Reginald Rose was born in New York City on December 10. 1920 and he worked at a series of uneven occupations. including a receiving clerk. window cleansing agent. and camp counsellor He served in the U. S. Army in World War II. finishing his circuit of responsibility first lieutenant. he had been loath to function on a jury. he wrote “the minute I walked into the tribunal room…and found myself confronting a unusual adult male whose destiny was all of a sudden more or less in my custodies. my full attitude changed. ” ( Twelve Angry Men. Pg. 288. 378 ) . Juror # Eight is such a great adult male to turn someone’s life upside down and do him last such a atrocious punishment such as decease punishment which no one’s acquire a opportunity to rectify his errors no more. or even repent it. because it merely ends the life of that individual everlastingly.

And all it takes is an blessing from the Jurors and the justice and so the instance would be sort of closed and so he would be died that child will owe Juror # Eight for the remainder of his life for giving him a new life. While Juror # Eight is acquiring criticized by Jurors # Three. Sever. and Twelve but Juror # Eight says that he does non cognize whether the adult male is guilty or non but that it is non easy for him to direct a male child to his decease without discoursing the facts of the instance. ( Twelve Angry Men. P. g290 ) . And it was the right thing to make and merely looking at the instance from a three dimensional manner and non being selfish and egoistic and merely vote for guilty and directing that child to decease punishment and stoping his life so easy. Juror # Eight Besides insists that. “during the test. excessively many inquiries were left unasked” . “He asks for the slaying arm to be brought in” and says that “it is possible that person else stabbed the boy’s male parent with a similar knife. ” ( Twelve Angry Men p. g. 290 ) .

Juror # Eight was truly smart when he replied to the angriest juryman which was juryman # Two and he says “According to the jurisprudence. the suspect does non hold to show his artlessness. He is guiltless until proven guilty. The 2nd component is that the finding of fact must be consentaneous. since unanimity guards against a abortion of justness. Third. the suspect can be convinced merely in the absence of sensible uncertainty on the portion of the jury. If there is sensible uncertainty. he must be acquitted.

The implicit in rule is that it is better that a guilty adult male be set free than an guiltless adult male be convinced. ” ( Twelve Angry Men. P. g379 ) It was a existent hot twenty-four hours for the jurymans inside that closed room and all they had is a fan. because back in that clip they did non hold air conditioners or any stronger ice chests for the room and that stressed a batch of them out doing them take the easy way which is non intelligent and merely vote for guilty. The kineticss of group behaviour merely make non work that manner. In the fiftiess. a survey of 255 tests by the Chicago Jury Project turned up no illustrations of such an happening.

The survey. in Which mikes were placed in the jury room to enter deliberations. found that 30 per centum of instances were decided. either for strong belief or acquittal. on the first Ballot. In 90 five perfect of instances. the bulk on the first ballot persuaded the minority to their point of position. In the other words. the manner a jury foremost casts its ballot penchants is the best forecaster of the concluding finding of fact.

This decision has been confirmed by much research in jury behaviour over the past half century which includes the drama “Twelve Angry Men” ( Twelve Angry Men. P. g299 ) Juror # Three is about all the drama in one manner that ne’er changed it’s a atrocious manner and he is besides seeking his best to throw emphasis on everybody he about got angry at everybody excessively he got angry at Juror # Four merely for stating the lone word that he would ne’er cognize what it truly means it’s the word carnival. After Juror # 3 angrily says “What do you intend? There are no secrets in here! I know who it was. What’s the affair with you? You come in here and you vote guilty and so this slipperiness sermonizer starts to rupture your hear tout with narratives about a hapless small child who merely couldn’t aid going a liquidator. So you change your ballot. If that isn’t the most nauseating. ”

Foreman stops him and says “Now hold it. ” And Juror figure four says “I agree with you that the adult male is guilty but let’s be just. ” ( Twelve Angry Men. Act Two. P. g27 ) And that’s what made Juror # Three ferocious. Merely hearing the word carnival. Juror # Eight keeps acquiring angry but really he does hold his one and merely alibi which is Juror # 3 has a boy.

x

Hi!
I'm Tamara!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out