However, as the play progresses, we see that each of the jurors came to their decision in a very different manner. Four thinks each person is responsible for his actions regardless of his situation, but Eleven understands the negative impacts of mistreatment. People treat people poorly in general. The movie is about a New York jury that was deliberating after the trial of an 18-year-old Puerto Rican teenager that was accused with murder for stabbing his day to death. Must a phenomenon be reduced from a multitude of intricately detailed interactions in time and space to a few numbers to be worth thinking seriously about? If you are among the sect of society that I just mentioned, read this book.
We hear neither prosecutor nor defense attorney, and learn of the evidence only second-hand, as the jurors debate it. For extra help while reading, keep track of the changes and opinions of each juror. He suggests that the gentleman may have exaggerated what he witnessed in order to be important for the first time in his life. Angrily, he accuses Juror Eight of being stubborn and says Juror Eight will accomplish nothing even if he hangs the jury. Reginald Rose evidently intends to critique the judicial system via this play and seems to suggest that trials do not necessarily result in justice being done. Well, half of it, anyway.
We will see how the contents of the unconscious area will largely affect the decision making process of some of the jurors. But Juror 8 insists that this still isn't a strong enough reason for sending someone to the chair. He emerges as the leader of the group. Not only were the walls closing in, the ceiling was as well. Lumet uses closeups rarely, but effectively: One man in particular--Juror No.
He tells them that their decision must be unanimous. Another issue dealt with in the movie is prejudice. They are just the wrong color; and that is so unfair that makes me sick. Then Juror 9, after seeing Juror 4 rub his nose which is being irritated by his eye glasses , realizes that, like Juror 4, the woman who allegedly saw the murder had impressions in the sides of her nose which she rubbed, indicating that she wore glasses, but did not wear them to court out of vanity. Finally, a female witness claims that she saw the killing take place.
If Lumet is not among the most famous of American directors, that is only because he ranges so widely he cannot be categorized. The film shows us nothing of the trial itself except for the judge's perfunctory, almost bored, charge to the jury. A raw, open and honest look at what it means to be a Black man in America. This collection of essays puts the reader in the place of each author, an exercise in empathy every person needs to experience, especially white people in the U. What I'd like to say, and even this sounds shitty, is that I wish the essays had been easier to take at face value. But Juror 9 reminds him that the burden of proof is on the prosecution and not the defendant.
Juror Seven, meanwhile, expresses his impatience to get to a current Broadway show that night. Davis casts a not guilty vote. This is a book everyone, and I mostly mean people who don't believe racial profiling exists, or that police brutality exists, needs to read. Apparently, the kid's father was really abusive, and it sounds like the kid stabbed him when he'd finally had enough of the abuse. To the benefit of the deliberation process, 1 the very elderly juror Joseph Sweeney is the only one who can see a possible motive explaining why an elderly witness may have misled the court in his testimony; 2 the one fellow Jack Klugman who grew up in a rough neighborhood, where he witnessed numerous knife fights, is the only one who sees a problem in assuming that the defendant made the stab wound found; and 3 the juror who had done contract work by the elevated subway Edward Binns was the only one in a position to question what one of the witnesses might or might not have heard.
His defenses start to crumble as his unconscious emotions become visible to him. Juror Twelve complains about the heat in the room, saying that his taxes are so high they ought to cover air conditioning. But so many of these essays include without apology, as if it becomes the right thing to do, these situations escalating because the writers have decided courtesy was something they didn't have to show, that they've earned the right to behave in a passive aggressive manner. While some have evidently logically weighed the facts, others have relied on bias, gut feelings and instinct. Ultimately, they decide to go around the table, explaining why they believe the boy to be guilty, in hopes of convincing 8th Juror. His intentions was for a supportive climate, but instead he was met with personalities the conflicted with his own and others. To the contrary, the unnamed men who are tasked with the fate of a young man could be your father, husband, son, or grandfather and every personality type is portrayed in this fascinating psychological.
Then again, today if you're a Christian at all, you're in defensive mode and then are questioned as to why you're in defensive mode Starbucks can design its holiday cups anyway it wants, okay? This book presents 12 stories of verbal and physical abuse received by 12 black men in America. After questioning his sanity they hastily decide to humor the juror 8 Henry Fonda by agreeing to discuss the trial for one hour. Juror Six is not the most intelligent of the group and he spends much of his time listening to and contemplating the opinions of the other jurors. Their only sin: being black. The men file in and decide to take a short break before deliberating. The defendant, if found guilty, would receive a mandatory death penalty.