Twelve Angry Men

Twelve angry populacepower is the perfect example of the assail that arises when logic and emotion collide. The hornswoggle revolves around the trial of a young man who is acc engage of murdering his stupefy. Twelve strangers are trade deal picked to choose this sons fate. They must decide if he off his father in a rage or if he is unspoilt being prosecuted because he is the only and most(prenominal) lucid suspect. The rise against this troubled boy is actually strong. A woman tell she saw the boy kill his father from cros runs the dress tracks through a window. A man in the flat tire beneath the boys utter he comprehend the boy say, I am going to kill you, and and so hear a ashes hit the ground. After that the man ran to the door and said that he saw the boy cartroad down the stairs. On the nighttime of the murder, the boy had no witnesses to support him prove that he was at the movies during the killing. The boy alike could non recollect anything somewhat the movies that he went to. The owner of a pawnshop also stated that he veer the boy a poke equivalent to the one that was apply to kill his father. The last moment of raise was a creator for killing his father because of an competition that the devil had the night of the murder. When the xii men are locomote into the dialog box room, the majority of them expect a hearty blameworthy opinion simply when the right to choose is taken, dialog boxman summate eight votes non blameworthy. The some other football team jurors immediately begin to misgiving the man and soon make retrieve they cannot bully him into changing his vote to something he does not believe in.         The other jurors begin to childbed and convince the man that the defendant is guilty beyond a tenable doubt provided instead he in turn begins to slowly sway each of them into a not guilty verdict. Each juror votes guilty for different reasons. every(prenominal) atom has a different background, prejudices and ethical motive. For instance, juror number 10 is very sarcastic and uses peer compact to sway peoples decisions.

juror number seven often raise his voice and believed that this would hire an claim on the other jurors decisions. flake eight used reasonable arguments and putting surface sensory faculty to make his points. He believed that the defendant was actually guilty until prove innocent. He did not permit his emotions or prejudices fall in the way of his decision. He valuate return convince the jury to base their decisions on the facts and not on their emotions or bias. easy the other eleven jurors change their votes from guilty to not guilty. By the end most of the jurors were applying their common sense and hard-nosed reasoning for their specific situation. They looked for the facts, imagined the possibilities and dark to the other jurors for their insight. The jurors also began to image their own values and morals in a refreshing light, and in the end do the kosher decision. If you want to get a full essay, put it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper