What do we learn from the judge’s charge to the jury about the crime and the possible sentence?
What do we learn from the judge’s charge to the jury about the crime and the possible sentence? A defendant must be found not guilty if any question of guilt exists in the minds of the jurors.
What is eights reason for voting not guilty?
In the first vote, Juror 8 is the only one to vote not guilty. He does this not because he really feels that the defendant is necessarily innocent, but for another reason altogether. He votes not guilty because he feels that the group should discuss a case with such serious consequences before deciding
Did three finally believe the boy was not guilty or did he vote just to get it over with support your answer?
Did Three finally believe the boy was not guilty, or did he vote just to get it over with? Support your answer. He voted because he believed he was not guilty. Four told him,let him live, and Eight said,He is not your boy.
How was the problem solved in 12 Angry Men?
By the jury separating from bigotry, the tenth juror realized his error, changed his vote to not guilty and remained quiet for the rest of the session. Therefore, the conflict was resolved by separating from the lone offender, juror four calmly telling juror ten that he said enough and to not say anymore.
What did the jurors in 12 Angry Men learn about the Constitution?
Those who wrote our constitutions knew from history and experience that it was necessary to protect against unfounded criminal charges brought to eliminate enemies and against judges too responsive to the voice of higher authority.
What must the jury decide 12 Angry Men?
The twelve men must decide a murder case. If they find the defendant guilty, he will be given the death sentence. Finally, Juror 8 proposes that they take a second vote using a secret ballot: If everyone votes guilty, he will join them in order to convict. But Juror 9 votes not guilty, so deliberations continue.
How does the demonstrated use of a switchblade knife influence the jury’s understanding of the crime?
How does the demonstrated use of a switchblade knife influence the jury’s understanding of the crime? It shows them how the boy supposedly stabbed his father and shows how the father received the stab wound. Juror #10 stands up and yells out about his feelings following the fourth vote.
Did the jury prove that the defendant was not guilty?
Did the jury prove that the defendant was not guilty? No, they just proved that there was reasonably doubt to the fact that he was guilty
Why do you think Juror 3 was the last one to vote not guilty?
Juror 3 changed his vote after realizing that all of his anger toward the defendant was a direct result of his bad relationship with his son. Due to his change of vote from guilty to not guilty, Juror 3 shows growth in character and is therefore considered dynamic.
How did Juror Number 8 convince the other jurors?
Finally, Juror #8 helps convince some of the last holdouts by showing them that the other key witness was almost certainly not wearing her glasses when she allegedly saw the boy kill his father. For most of the jurors, this is the final nail in the coffin, and the verdict eventually turns to Not Guilty.
What proposal does Juror 8 make at the end of Act 1?
What proposal does juror Eight make at the end of the act? What is his motive for making the proposal? He proposes a secret ballot vote. If it’s still 11 to 1 he will change his vote.
Why did juror change his vote to not guilty?
He is the last one to change his vote at the very end of the play as he caves to the pressure from the other jurors. He changes his vote initially because many of the other jurors have, but they convince him he should do it because he believes the boy might not be guilty.
Why was juror number 3 so convinced that the boy was guilty of killing his father?
Juror 3 voted guilty because he wanted to get it over with. He also didn’t have enough courage to stand alone, nor was able to give facts to back up his reasoning for saying the boy was guilty.
Where does the vote stand at the beginning of Act 3?
At the beginning of Act III of Twelve Angry Men, the men take an open vote. The split is even, with six voting guilty and six voting for acquittal. The first juror to vote for not guilty, Juror 8, finds himself alone against all the other jurors.
Why does eight say he voted not guilty?
In the first vote, Juror 8 is the only one to vote not guilty. He does this not because he really feels that the defendant is necessarily innocent, but for another reason altogether. He votes not guilty because he feels that the group should discuss a case with such serious consequences before deciding
Why does juror four change his vote to not guilty?
Why does four change his vote to not guilty? He changes it because he relied on the woman across the street but now he has reasonable doubt. He just voted to get it over with because he was swayed when they told him that the boy isn’t his son. He also doesn’t have the courage to stand alone like 8 did.
What was the main problem in 12 Angry Men?
12 Angry Men focuses on a jury’s deliberations in a capital murder case. A 12-man jury is sent to begin deliberations in the first-degree murder trial of an 18-year old Puerto Rican boy accused in the stabbing death of his father, where a guilty verdict means an automatic death sentence.
How were most decisions made in 12 Angry Men?
Labeling Theory In 12 Angry Men It is extremely interesting to watch how most of the jurors had their minds made up about the case even before deliberation; however, as the film progresses the jurors stop labeling the defendant and instead make their verdict decision based on facts.
What does the ending of 12 Angry Men mean?
After convincing the jury to give a Not Guilty verdict, Juror #8 walks over to #3, his nemesis, and puts his coat on for him. The gesture shows us that despite the extent to which they’ve argued in the jury room, there will be no hard feelings once they head back into the world.
What amendments and rights were used in 12 Angry Men?
Twelve Angry Men, originally written for television by Reginald Rose in 1954 and subsequently adapted for stage (1955), film(1957) and television again (1997), effectively conveys the central importance of the right to a jury trial afforded by Article III of the Constitution as well as Amendments V, VI, and XIV.
What does 12 Angry Men say about our justice system?
12 Angry Men (1957) is a love letter to the American judicial system that equally points out the faults in the people that system protects and serves. It’s clearly set in New York but could just as easily be anywhere else; it could be anyone on trial and any American in the jury chambers.
What do the jurors decide?
The role of the jury in both criminal and civil trials is to determine questions of fact and to apply the law, as stated by the judge, to those facts to reach a verdict. In criminal trials, the jury’s role is to determine guilt or otherwise. In civil trials, the jury’s role is to decide fault and damages.
How did Juror 8 convince other jurors?
Finally, Juror #8 helps convince some of the last holdouts by showing them that the other key witness was almost certainly not wearing her glasses when she allegedly saw the boy kill his father. For most of the jurors, this is the final nail in the coffin, and the verdict eventually turns to Not Guilty.
What does the jury have to decide?
The jury listens to the evidence during a trial, decides what facts the evidence has established, and draws inferences from those facts to form the basis for their decision. The jury decides whether a defendant is guilty or not guilty in criminal cases, and liable or not liable in civil cases.
What is the jury’s final verdict in 12 Angry Men?
The verdict of a seemingly open and shut case lies in the hands of twelve Jury members, the verdict is obvious, guilty.
