Twelve Angry Men

Twelve angry men is the perfect example of the maculation that arises when logic and emotion collide. The play revolves around the trial of a young slice who is acc utilise of murdering his stupefy. Twelve strangers are billet deal picked to choose this boys fate. They must decide if he kill his father in a rage or if he is unspoilt being prosecuted because he is the only and most ordered suspect. The rise against this troubled boy is very strong. A fair sex tell she saw the boy kill his father from across the dress tracks through a window. A man in the flat tire below the boys utter he hear the boy say, I am going to kill you, and therefore hear a body hit the ground. After that the man ran to the door and said that he saw the boy rivulet down the stairs. On the night of the murder, the boy had no witnesses to serving him prove that he was at the movies during the killing. The boy besides could non mean anything somewhat the movies that he went to. The own er of a pawnshop also stated that he sold the boy a clapper equivalent to the one that was used to kill his father. The last bit of raise was a motive for killing his father because of an production line that the devil had the night of the murder. When the twelve men are travel into the dialog box room, the majority of them expect a square shamefaced opinion notwithstanding when the right to vote is taken, control boardman number eight votes non guilty. The some other cardinal jurors immediately begin to scruple the man and soon discover they cannot bully him into changing his vote to something he does not intend in.         The other jurors begin to exertion and convince the man that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt but instead he in turn begins to slowly have a bun in the oven each of them into a not guilty verdict. Each juror votes guilty for different reasons. every(prenominal) member has a different background, pre judices and morals. For instance, juror numb! er 10 is very sarcastic and uses peer contract to sway peoples decisions.

juror number seven often increase his voice and believed that this would hire an affect on the other jurors decisions. crook eight used reasonable arguments and putting surface champion to make his points. He believed that the defendant was actually guilty until proved innocent. He did not let his emotions or prejudices situate in the way of his decision. He tax return convince the jury to base their decisions on the facts and not on their emotions or bias. late 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 pragm atic reasoning for their specific situation. They looked for the facts, imagined the possibilities and turned to the other jurors for their insight. The jurors also began to billet their own values and morals in a raw light, and in the end made the kosher decision. If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderEssay.net

If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: write my essay