Norms: . Respect elders (e. g. , the laborer is the self-appointed enforcer of good manners).
The jurors had come to value a case based on facts, not prejudice or stereotypes. Those who upheld this value (Juror 8 and the Juror 4) were respected and became leaders that were looked to for guidance.
The jurors that maintained arguments based on stereotypes alienated themselves from the others… The decision has to be unanimous (hung jury was something nobody liked).
No racial prejudices were tolerated (everybody turned their backs to juror 10 when he started saying that “he knew people of these kind very well”) Processes: The group initially started with a process of arriving at a decision by voting and there was a groupthink causing everyone (apart from juror 8) to vote guilty. Then a secret ballot was carried out and it was decided that the jury would debate for at least an hour before deciding on the fate of the boy. The first turning point in the jury’s decision-making process occurs when Juror 8 dramatically produces a switchblade exactly like the murder weapon, thus disproving the prosecution’s argument that the murder weapon was unique in design, Juror 8 had walked through the defendant’s neighborhood earlier that week and had bought the knife from a local pawnshop, even though he knew it was against the law to purchase a switchblade. Juror 8 thus causes a few jurors to question the strength of the prosecution’s case; his illegal purchase of the switchblade enables him to break the force of the majority’s resistance to his viewpoint.
The Essay on Discrimination lawsuit. Why jury decision making emotional damages
Discrimination lawsuit Introduction Presenting evidence In court proceedings, evidence is presented as either oral or written depending on the choice of the witness. In addition, the means of giving evidence may be determined by the court or the jury in charge under various considerations. Both oral and written evidence have the same purpose and can be used as the basis of court ruling ...
Juror 8 convinces the other jurors, one by one, to analyze the evidence, and their grudging review of the facts slowly convinces them that there is a reasonable doubt as to the defendant’s guilt. The jurors never find the truth? the identity of the true murderer is never discovered? but justice occurs within the institution of the court with the jury’s verdict of not guilty. This just result is brought about because one juror, motivated by his respect for the law and its processes, is able to defy the peer pressure of the jury room in his quest for the truth. The jurors are transformed by the process of deliberating. Eleven men voted guilty because of their prejudices, fears, laziness and insecurities, but they are eventually persuaded by reason to give up these limiting beliefs, to see the potential in the facts, and to find justice. The critical turning points in the jury votes occur, not when there is passion and anger, but when there is reasoned discussion, as the rational Juror 8 triumphs over the prejudices of his fellow jurors.
The facts of the case do not change, but the jurors come to see the facts differently, and change by the process they go through. Despite the hostility and tension created in this process, the twelve men end up reconciled, and justice is done. Roles: Role Explanation Portrayed by Reasons Task Oriented Roles initiator-contributor suggests new ideas to solve group problem or new ways for the group to organize the task Juror 8 (Henry Fonda) Suggested that the jury deliberate for at least and hour information giver / seeker deals with information and facts about the group’s task Juror 8 (Henry Fonda).
Produced an identical knife. Asked for the floor plan opinion seeker / giver deals with the group’s values regarding its tasks Juror 8 (Henry Fonda) Presented an in-depth analysis of the facts of the case rather than a superficial viewpoint Energizers tries to keep up the group’s energy level Elaborator goes into detail about how group plans would work Juror 1 (Martin Balsam).
Juror 1 took the responsibility of voting every time vote was called for. Juror 1 also explained to the group the initial process of each person stating his stand and giving reasons Coordinator coordinates group activities Juror 1 (Martin Balsam).
The Essay on Group Engagement Exercise
The experience of this week’s Engagement Exercise made clear to me one idea that I am posting here as the hypothesis: Time and the need for joint efforts are absolutely necessary for the collective of individuals to become a group. Several people put together formally will never become a group, not to mention a team. Two factors are absolutely necessary: time and joint work. Time allows people to ...
Takes care of group voting. Asks everybody to speak out his ideas on the caseOrienter keeps the group focused on its goals Recorder acts as the memory of the group RELATIONS- ORIENTED ROLES (SOCIO EMOTIONAL) Harmonizer tries to keep relations between group members harmonious Compromiser offers to compromise own position to keep the group harmonious Encourager praises and encourages group members Juror 9 (Joseph Sweeney) On the second vote, voted not guilty because he wanted to encourage Juror 8 (and also praise him for standing alone against groupthink) Gatekeeper facilitates the participation of others in the group Juror 6 (Ed Binns) Encouraged Juror 9 to speak and not be afraid of Juror 3 group observer supplies the group with observations of its procedures Juror 6 (Ed Binns) Constantly reminded Juror 3 to speak to Juror 9 with respect (as old men deserved respect) SELF- ORIENTED ROLES Blocker disagrees with the group and revives old issues for discussion Juror 3 (Lee J. Cobb) Was the lone juror left at the end but still kept defying logic and kept bringing back old points (the woman had seen the boy murder his father) recognition seeker seeks personal honor in the group Dominator attempts to manipulate the group and dominate others — persecutor Juror 3 (Lee J. Cobb).
Tried to shut up juror 1 on a number of occasions. Tried to shout his way through. Launched an attack on Juror 4 for changing his vote (although he had not) Avoider refuses to focus on the task or group relationship problems Juror 7 (Jack Warden) and Juror 12 (Robert Webber).
Juror 7 kept referring to he baseball game and was distracted throughout.
Juror 12 kept telling everyone irrelevant stories about his work and had no real inputs for the group Aggressor attacks the group Juror 3 (Lee J. Cobb) Attacked the group towards the end saying that everybody had been conned by juror 8 self- confessor uses the group as a forum for inappropriate talk about self Juror 12 (Robert Webber) help seeker looks for sympathy from others — victim Clown shows non-involvement in group and engages in distracting communication Juror 7 (Jack Warden) Dominator attempts to manipulate the group and dominate others Juror 3 (Lee J. Cobb).
The Research paper on New Enterprise Group
Bob Chen came from the oriental culture. He was born in Hong Kong. He came to Canada to study and was eventually given the opportunity to work in one of the largest public accounting firms in Canada, James-Williams. As most Orientals, he was quiet and soft-spoken. He was not a straightforward person. He does not readily utter his exact opinions about a situation or a person. This courteous ...
