Every man put on trial is considered innocent until proven guilty. In 12 Angry Men this theory can almost be considered false to the jurors involved in this murder case. But one man can be credited with sticking to the innocent until proven guilty theory that most likely saved a mans life. This juror must show 11 other jurors that he can prove with enough valid evidence that this boy is be wrongfully accused of killing his father. Reginald Rose shows us how that one mans integrity can prove to make a big difference in a kids life.
Juror #8 can be credited with saving someones life. Under intense and hostile scrutiny juror #8 is the only juror to vote not guilty on the stabbing death of a boys father. #8 doesnt believe straight out that this boy is innocent of this crime. #8 believes that it would wrong to send a boy off to be executed without discussing it first. Jurors #3 and #10 are the most hostile of the jurors. They believe deep down that this boy killed his father.
They believe that everything they heard in the courtroom holds true and they dont really want to see this kid live any longer. Juror #8 still had reasonable doubt about the murder. He doesnt want to vote guilty until he has enough evidence that this boy did indeed kill his father. Many different points are made about the boy who supposedly stabbed his father, that are cross examined well by juror #8 who still stands alone at not guilty. All of the evidence that the 11 jurors found contains flaws in them. For instance the woman who supposedly witnessed the stabbing wasnt wearing her glasses.
The Term Paper on Reasonable Doubt Juror Boy Man
In Twelve Angry Men, the audience gets to view the two sides of the legal system. We view the institution that would want to be objective, and the human element, the jury, where each individual brings his own personal subjective point of view. This movie exposes the different types of people called to judge ones peers and the complexity of human nature and what different circumstances influence a ...
Also the stab wound in the boys father was made so that a taller man or boy could have made that type of wound with a switchblade knife. When these key pieces of evidence becomes clearer to the 11 jurors we start to see jurors questioning there own guilty vote. #9 is the second juror to vote guilty, because he too has some reasonable doubt. As more evidence is put on th table the 12 jurors come together and decide that this boy is innocent. In conclusion, juror #8 believes that every person is innocent until proven guilty. He was given many pieces of key evidence that showed this boys guilt but the evidence was examined carefully, and as more evidence was put out more jurors believed this boy was indeed innocent bringing them all together to believe this boys innocence.
