12 Angry Man Review

Rating: 8/10 (11 November 2016)

"12 Angry Men" depicts a negotiation among a jury in the 1950s in the United States. The negotiation is regarding a patricide case where the defendant will be issued the death penalty if found guilty. The play revolves around the opinions, perceptions, reason and logic of twelve different characters that are tasked with pronouncing the guilt or innocence of a 16-year-old boy accused of patricide. In his closing statement, the judge instructed the jury that a "guilty" verdict can only be delivered in the absence of a reasonable doubt and they had to arrive at a unanimous decision before they could present the verdict to him.
Some of the notable interests identified in the course of negotiations came from Jurors #3, #7 and #10. After the jury was tied at six to six, Juror #8 brings up the the testimony of the arresting police officer and Juror #5 contests the claim that the defendant had the competency to inflict the chest wound on the deceased. As the discussion went on, Juror #7 decided to change his vote to "break it up" and swing it to 7 to 5 in favour of "not guilty" because he got jaded and was more interested in attending a baseball game in which he had tickets for. Therefore, his interest was for negotiations to end quickly. Juror #10 despised people from the slums and his attitude suggested that the defendant probably deserved the death penalty. Clouded by his prejudice against the defendant, he completely disregarded the notion of justice. In his final monologue when the jury was 11 to 1 in favour of "not guilty", we observe that Juror #3 was the last to "break". This happened only after his emotional outbursts of anger was shown from the broken relationship and hurt he felt from his own son. Therefore, his interests showed that he was confused about his position as to whether the boy deserved the death penalty as he made a call based on the personal hurt that he had experienced.
In conclusion, 12 Angry Men is a classic movie which proves why the American trial-by-jury system is effective in helping the judge mete out a verdict. It showcases the great diversity in America and the several challenges it produces. Fisher also points out the importance of having various experts and professions' perspectives and opinions which will help to examine the problem.