Use of Persuasive Argument in 12 Angry Men Essay

During the time Reginald Rose wrote the play Twelve Angry Men America was not an equal place for all people. A democracy is founded on the ideology that all Americans should be given a fair trial in court before being declared guilty. The twelve jurors in the play come from various backgrounds but initially, all but one vote in favor of the boy’s unforgivable sentence; while two other jurors lift two strong social stigmas and overcome their bias. One juror decided to stand up and take the time out for proper reasoning that resulted in teaching the others two jurors a lesson. Final verdicts should be made on justifiable grounds or the foundation of America’s society could be left at risk for collapse. Justifiable final verdicts are skewed

These statements display that the 8th Juror, as an individual, know exactly what he has to do as a jury member and is also honest, moral and trustworthy enough to lead the other jurors. For that reason, we observer the 8th Juror stepping forward to become a ‘saviour’ of the jury system.

The film “Twelve Angry Men” directed by Sidney Lumet illustrates many social psychological principles. The tense, gripping storyline that takes place in the 1950s features a group of jurors who must decide unanimously whether a young man is guilty or innocent in the murder of his father. At the beginning, eleven of the twelve jurors voted guilty. Gradually, through some heated discussion, the jurors are swayed to a not-guilty verdict. Upon examination, the film highlights social psychology theories in areas of conformity and group influence.

The complexity of justice is evident in Reginald Rose’s ‘Twelve Angry Men’, through the employment of Truth throughout the American 1950’s judicial system. Throughout the text, the concept of justice is forged by the racal prejudices, personal bias, emotion, logistics, and reasoning of the Jurors, thus allowing truth to hinder or prevail. Justice is shaped by truth in ‘Twelve Angry Men’, as the Jurors begin to understand the reasonable doubt in the evidence against the defendant, as the truth becomes prevalent through the Juror’s deductive capabilities, thus allowing for injustice to be hindered by the truth, which ultimately leads justice to prevail in the judicial system.

Reginald Rose’s text, Twelve Angry Men, follows the jury deliberation of a small murder case, with a cast of twelve jury men discussing the evidence presented in court to decide whether the defendant is innocent or guilty. Over the course of the play, led primarily by moral compass jury number 8, the verdict is changed from eleven to one to acquittal, as the men are persuaded and subject to constant distractions, prejudice, bullying, and discussions of unreliable witness testimonies and lawyers, thus exploring issues about the validity of the justice system in magnitude.

He had a pretty miserable eighteen years... I just think we owe him a few words. That 's all.” Juror Eight uses the appeal of logos often throughout the film, but one of the most prominent examples occurs when the jurors are discussing the knife that Juror 4 has pointed out is a unique knife that the storekeeper testified it was  “…The only one of it’s kind he had ever had in stock.” Juror Eight responds to Juror Four by saying, “No. I 'm saying it 's possible that the boy lost the knife and that someone else stabbed his father with a similar knife. It 's possible.” Then Juror Eight pulls the same knife from his pocket and stabs it into the table next to the murder weapon. Along with the three appeals, Juror Eight also utilizes logical fallacies to prove a point with other jurors.

Also during this storming process, Juror #8 was aware of all the opposition he was facing with his not guilty vote, and realized he needed to take the role of taking charge in opening up dialog to discuss the case. In this power struggle, he influenced some of the other Jury members by bargaining. Bargaining is a tool used to offer an exchange. He used this tool to convince others to discuss the case by giving them a choice. He presented them with a 2nd vote in which he would exclude himself from, and if all remaining voters still believe the boy is guilty of murder, he would conform to the mass vote, end the case and send the boy to the electric chair. But if not, they will take more time to deliberate and open a genuine discussion of the case. The 2nd vote turned Juror #9’s vote from guilty to not guilty, and Juror #8 was successful in his bargaining

(Rose 72). Juror Eight has already analyzed Juror Three’s defensive behavior and

Many important topics and integral information that is an essential part in the criminal justice system have been introduced in the play “12 Angry Men”. Some examples of this would be crime and justice including the laws, criminal behavior, victimization, and the criminal justice system in itself. These issues are everyday situations but many people have been oblivious to the problem. The twelve jurors have an assignment where they will have to decide whether or not the young man on trial is guilty of murdering his father or is innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. All twelve men are frustrated and lack patience which lead them to be contumacious and unfocused. Their distraction led to many key facts getting misemployed and emotions start to cross making it hard for the jurors to construct a resolution. They have been oblivious to the effect that it would have on the community itself. On the information given up to this point this process essay will articulate the unenlightenment and egomaniacal principles of the twelve men in the short story and movie "Twelve Angry Men" written by Reginald Rose and directed by Sidney Lumet. Both Lumet and Rose showed their point of views of the criminal justice system in the play and the movie. Although the director's view on the justice system demonstrated the rights that everyone had, it also revealed his thoughts on how the justice system is corrupt, ineffective and unjust because all these aspects have shown the major differences in the morality of the twelve individuals and the problem at hand in the movie and play “12 Angry Men”.

In the world renowned play Twelve Angry Men, the accused’s innocence or guilt is never resolved. Set in the New York summer of 1957, the playwright Reginald Rose explores themes of prejudice and the right to justice in his play and surprisingly finishes his play without a verdict. However there are many signs which directly encourage the reader to believe that the defendant is not guilty. The quintessential nature of this epiphany is displayed when Juror 3 finally concedes that the defendant is not guilty and all 12 jurors walk out of the jury room. This is a solid example of the accused’s guilt being resolved.

Juror 1: Juror 1 had taken the charge of jury. The votes were counted by him. Whatever he was saying which was to be done. He was maintaining the order.

Juror #8 was much more successful with his critical thinking since the beginning of the movie. He was the only one of the jurors that voted not guilty. He expressed that “it’s not easy to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first,” when he is being pressed by the others as to why he did not vote guilty. This is the first step he takes to get the others to talk and think about the case. He uses the idea that “supposing we’re wrong”, when talking about the

Reginald Rose’s ’12 Angry Men’ brings 12 jurors together in a room to decide whether a young foreign boy is guilty of killing his father. The play is interwoven with dynamic characterisation, striking symbolism and intense moments of drama. Although Rose positions Juror 8 as the hero, the strongest character is in fact Juror 4, who is an independent thinker, rational and calm even as tension begins to build. Although Juror 4 initially votes guilty, he is able to admit his fault and change his vote.

Jurors number eight calmly responses to all the criticism by saying he just does not know what to believe and refuses to send a young man to death if he is not one hundred percent sure he did not commit the crime. He then explains that he is not there to try and change their mind but to just talk for a while and put everything on the table. Juror number ten ignorantly argues back saying how he does not believe him at all. Also adding in that all of “them” are born

The movie, ’12 Angry Men’ showcases the trial of a young boy, who is accused of stabbing his father and causing him death. Throughout the play, the jury is able to follow through the actions of 12 men, who compose the jury. All of these men come from different backgrounds and the most astounding feature of the movie is in the manner that the experiences and personalities of these members of the jury influences their initial perception of the case. The personal bias and past experiences of the juror’s number 10, 11, and 3 are brought on focus, as they serve to inform the biased notions they have toward the accused. The film is an expose and indictment of the American jury system, which purports to uphold a strong sense of lack of bias and infallibility.