Research Paper on:
Each of the Jurors in 12 Angry Men

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
should operate. Yet, it also uncovers the problems with the jury system. The fact, had the juror played by Henry Fonda not gone against the grain, an innocent boy might  have been executed. Unlike true life, there is at least presently no system that would sentence a young boy to death without at least a subsequent sentencing hearing. Yet, despite  its flaws, Twelve Angry Men is an exercise in jurisprudence. Yes, this is what is supposed to happen in the jury room. However, it brings forth the chilling point that  something else might have happened. The film opens with the men having been given the case by the judge. They are to either convict or acquit a young boy  who is only seen for a moment. From the grumbling that appears as the film opens, it appears that most believe that the defendant is guilty. Some appear to go  grudgingly along with others as not to appear different. In fact, there is a psychology that says that people will generally try to be agreeable. But one man, Mr. Davis  whose name is only learned at the end, dissents from the opinion rendered. After an initial vote is taken to see where everyone stands on this case, it appears that  only Davis would vote "not guilty." Why? He is not sure that the boy is guilty and opens up a variety of doors. Might the lawyer have been negligent? How  could the eye witness have seen everything from the train on that night? And how does one know that the knife really belonged to the boy when there are dozens  like them sold in that neighborhood? Davis is logical but does not get much support at first. However, his first comrade is Mr. McCardle, played by Joseph Sweeney. Incidentally, those