1. Why does due process of law require that the prosecution prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

Because due process requires the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt-
every fact necessary to constitute the crime charged

2. Pick a juror, describe the way he made up his mind at first, and tell whether this is a proper way for a
juror to make up his mind. I choose juror 10 at first he was saying that he was guilty because of his
neighborhood and I think he was the one that said that the boy was born a liar. Then at the end I’m
not sure that he changed his mind because he wanted to go home but he changed his mind to not
guilty.

3. Do you think that the dissenting juror planned all along to try to convince the others? What were his
methods of persuasion? The 3rd juror refuses to agree with the others. We learn
early on that he has a bad relationship with his own, with whom he is no
longer speaking. We are led to believe that this is a contributing factor to
his prejudice against the defendant. He tries to project his own issues
with his son and his racial bigotry onto the defendant

4. One of the jurors originally felt that the boy was guilty because of the neighborhood that he had
grown up in. Was this a valid argument? No that wasn’t a valid argument.

5. How would you vote after hearing all the men’s statements after they circled the table the first time?
I’m not sure on what I would’ve voted, but I’ll most likely say not guilty

6. Does the dissenting juror have a point about the type of knife that was used? Why or why not? Yes,
that was a lot of information, well for me it was. It was important because it had to be used a different
way and the way he pointed out how a shorter person position would’ve been was also important.

7. How would you evaluate the doubts provided by jurors eight and five regarding the angle of the knife?
Are they as convincing as that raised about eyesight by the old man? By him showing the angle it’ll be
for him made me get a stronger feeling that he wasn’t guilty. They were about the same convincing
with the angle and eyesight.

8. Based on this film, does it seem that the best way to decide a case is for 12 citizens to make the
decision? Why or why not? Yes, it does because it showed how they were getting frustrated and upset
with everyone else.

9. How much do personal situations factor into a juror’s decision making process? This play is
not about jury behavior or jury psychology or jury sociology. The jury room is the mise-en-scene. It is
where and under what circumstances the play’s dramatic conflict takes place, but it is about what
prejudices people carry around with themselves, built on personal experiences, on which they make
decisions and act. It is a mistake to think that Reginald Rose was interested in or an expert on jury
psychology

10. If you voted guilty at the start of the deliberation, would you have changed your vote to not guilty
after listening to all the situations presented? Why or why not? Be specific. Yes, I would’ve because of
the old man was listing a lot of information like how it, would’ve took him 45 seconds I believe to get
downstairs and the way by the way he would’ve stabbed him and by that other guy telling him it
wouldn’t of worked that way.

This study source was downloaded by 100000875134440 from CourseHero.com on 03-04-2024 18:01:51 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/67670943/12-angry-mendocx/
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)