There are many themes that are present throughout the play "Twelve Angry Men." The two main themes that I picked up on were Justice and Doubt. Throughout the play, there are many times that the jurors change their minds about the verdict. There are jurors that think that justice will not be served unless the boy is executed. However, juror #8 is the first to believe otherwise in thinking that the boy may not be guilty. The 8th juror proposes the idea that they should all take a vote and 10 vote "guilty" while one votes "guilty." This means that one of the jurors changed their vote from guilty to not guilty. Juror #9 admits to changing his vote and says that he wants to hear the arguments out. The group has another heated discussion and then they all take another vote. This time, 5th, 8th, 9th, and 11th vote "not guilty." They all keep going back and forth with their verdicts because they want to serve justice but there is a lot of doubts in their minds about what really happened in the murder case.
All of the jurors keep bringing up main points in the case can be doubted. For instance, there was an old man who claimed that he saw the boy running from his apartment after he killed his father. The old man had a stroke and walks very slowly but says that he saw the boy run down the stairs in 15 seconds. When they test this out, they conclude that this situation would be impossible and there's no way that the old man could have gotten to his door in 15 seconds. They also bring up the woman who said that she saw the murder through her window. The woman typically wears glasses and the jurors questioned whether or not she was wearing classes in bed when she said she witnessed this murder. If the jurors didn't sit there and analyze every piece of evidence that they had, they could send an innocent man to jail if they didn't analyze the situation properly. They also could let a guilty man walk free if they thought that just because this was a father/son relationship and the man was only 19 that he wouldn't do something like this.
Would you be able to be a juror? How would you handle having to look at every angle of an investigation?
Personally, I don't think I would be able to be a juror. I am very easy to persuade, and I would be terrified if i made the wrong verdict towards a person. But if i were in this situation i would handle every angle but literally scanning every piece of evidence 10 times, i would ask a billion questions to get every other jurors opinions then i would re-listen to the accused's story multiple times to see if if i find any minuscule problem or mistake to be able to prove if he is guilty or not guilty.
ReplyDeleteby*** not but
DeleteI think I could handle jurory duty very well, because I believe I am very good at looking at everyone's point of view. Me being the person I am I find it very easy having to analyze every outcome and decipher the situation better then anyone else who was put into the position could.
ReplyDelete