12 angry men summary. Twelve Angry Men Summary 2022-12-30

12 angry men summary Rating: 5,1/10 352 reviews

12 Angry Men is a classic film that tells the story of a diverse group of jurors who must come to a unanimous decision in a murder trial. The film follows the jurors as they debate the case, with each one bringing their own biases and preconceived notions to the table.

The film begins with the jurors being escorted into the jury room to begin their deliberations. The judge instructs them to reach a verdict of either "guilty" or "not guilty" based on the evidence presented in the trial. The jurors are initially convinced that the defendant, a young man from a slum, is guilty of murdering his father. However, as they begin to discuss the case, several of the jurors begin to have doubts about the evidence and the defendant's guilt.

One of the jurors, Juror 8, played by Henry Fonda, takes the lead in questioning the validity of the evidence and the testimony of the witnesses. He points out several inconsistencies and discrepancies in the case, and suggests that the defendant may have been framed. He also appeals to the other jurors' sense of fairness and justice, arguing that it is their duty to give the defendant a fair trial and to not rush to judgment.

As the discussion continues, the other jurors begin to see the flaws in the prosecution's case and the possibility that the defendant may be innocent. Some of them are swayed by Juror 8's logic, while others are swayed by their own personal experiences or biases. Eventually, the jurors begin to shift their vote from guilty to not guilty, but they are still far from a unanimous decision.

The discussion becomes heated and emotional as the jurors grapple with the weight of their decision and the consequences of a guilty verdict. They must also confront their own prejudices and preconceived notions about the defendant and the crime. In the end, the jurors are able to come to a unanimous decision of not guilty, thanks in part to Juror 8's persistence and willingness to listen to and consider the perspectives of others.

12 Angry Men is a powerful and thought-provoking film that explores the themes of justice, fairness, and the power of a single individual to make a difference. It is a testament to the importance of critical thinking and the value of considering all sides of an issue before reaching a conclusion.

Twelve Angry Men Act 1 Summary & Analysis

12 angry men summary

Witnessing crime and poverty was a daily activity. The film is all about this issue, and the question remains until the end of the play. His normal was very different than what the average person considers to normal; therefore, his reactions to situations would be different than the average person. The net result is a large blind area. Let's look at a summary of Twelve Angry Men. What begins as an open-and-shut case of murder soon becomes a detective story that presents a succession of clues creating doubt, and a mini-drama of each of the jurors' prejudices and preconceptions about the trial, the accused, AND each other.


Next

Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose

12 angry men summary

The act of Juror 8 standing against the majority of the other jurors about the case, voting not guilty, allows the jurors to thoroughly dissect the case, understanding it fully and thoughtfully before making their decision of guilty or not guilty. Eleven jurors vote guilty, but The jurors review the evidence in the case. The jurors all believe the accused is guilty of murdering his father. Juror 8 helps Juror 3 put his jacket on, and Juror 3 leaves. Twelve jurors retire to the jury room as a murder trial concludes. This puts him on the defensive. This disturbance serves two purposes.


Next

Twelve Angry Men Summary

12 angry men summary

Juror 8 uses this to argue that if the young man had indeed threatened to kill his father, it did not prove he necessarily did so. Juror Three demonstrates on Juror Eight how it could be done, crouching down to approximate the boy's height and then raising the knife and making a downward stabbing motion. Implying this openness to the present, it has become crucial that a good decision relies on knowledge, experience, thorough analysis and most importantly critical thinking. If the court finds the accused guilty, the sentence for the crime will be the death penalty. He feels his sense of reality is in question and it threatens him.

Next

12 Angry Men Summary

12 angry men summary

When the story opens, the testimony part of the trial is over and the judge is instructing the jury regarding their duties. Four demonstrates his rhetorical skills and Three supports him because he is excited and impressed to have someone articulate the case against the kid so well. This could also be called denial in that the jurors are ignoring good reasoning. In doing so, he realizes the power of his emotions which forces him to step back and take a look at what he really feels. After all, a man is innocent until proven guilty. Juror 8 continues to argue that the evidence against the accused is weak. Juror Seven, meanwhile, expresses his impatience to get to a current Broadway show that night.

Next

12 Angry Men Act Two Summary and Analysis

12 angry men summary

He says the most important testimony is that of the woman who says she saw the murder. It begins with him chronicling logically the case; however, it quickly becomes clear that he is no longer talking about the defendant. In this episode, the jury is presiding over the case of a man accused of stabbing another man attempting to make a bank deposit. The jurors do another round of voting. Eleven of the jurors immediately vote guilty; only Juror No. Hank in the role based on juror 8 opposed to the new mower while the others praise it.

Next

12 Angry Men Summary and blog.sigma-systems.com

12 angry men summary

The movie is not just about the outcome of the trial of a Puerto Rican youth who has been accused of murdering his father, but also shows how the beliefs and attitudes of the twelve jurors lead to his acquittal. After a long time of arguing and fighting they all eventually agreed in the decision of the young man being non-guilty. As the jurors leave the room, Juror 8 helps the distraught Juror 3 with his coat in a show of compassion. As he claims this is possible, he reveals a second knife he has that is identical to the first. They vote again, and 9 is revealed to have changed his vote to not guilty, angering the others, particularly 10. Juror 3 agrees to vote not guilty. Perhaps the old man was wrong about how long it took him to get to the door, but right about what he saw? Can concerned Juror 8 overcome the obstinate prejudices of the other eleven members of the jury and let truth shine? Being aware of this is the first step to better understanding.


Next

12 Angry Men (TV Movie 1997)

12 angry men summary

He says that he will abstain. There were several witnesses who either heard screaming, saw the boy fleeing the scene, or witnessed the killing. He has not seen his son for more than two years. Eleven jurors vote guilty, and one juror, Juror Eight, votes not guilty. Juror Four changes his vote, so it is seven to five against declaring a hung jury. The movie illustrates the process of leveling and soliciting feedback which can make all the difference. .

Next

Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose Plot Summary

12 angry men summary

Act 2 Juror Three is angry with Juror Five because he thinks that Juror Five is the one who changed his vote. In the beginning of act two in Twelve Angry Men, a second vote amongst the jury members who voted guilty the first time takes place. Act 2 The Guard checks on the jurors after hearing the shouting. From the initial chitchat, it is clear that most members of the jury regard the man as guilty. Juror 8 does not flinch, and Juror 3 does not actually hurt him.

Next