Angry men a case study
Can the viewer Matching this movie a honestly say that he/she would have taken the ridicule from {Our fellow Jurors and the time to really think about a strangers guilt or innocence.
Even if that meant missing a birthday party or even your beloved baseball team play. 2 Angry Men takes the viewer on an emotional roller coaster ride with adequate swerves and stops that can leave the viewer breathless and even a little nauseous. Rhea main that Henry Found plays in the movie is that of an activist he is not the official leader of the group that is Juror number one or the captain, Found is really the Eng attendants only mouth piece in the beginning and as we will discuss not it t defendant is guilty or innocent but the acknowledgment of reasonable doubt. That ponders my mind the words reasonable doubt.
How many times have each of us condemning someone even if not vocally but 12 emotionally? Each time I watch this movie my overwhelming desire is to be dismissive of the missing son Juror and tell him to shut up doesn’t he see that the good guy Found) is making wonderful points. At the end of the movie I know that we couldn’t eave had the discussion at all if loud mouth missing son Juror had not been cast.
The sad truth is that the most angriest/loudest and meanest Juror helps form the democracy in that room.
This Juror cements the bond of brotherhood within the tribal ranks of the men who look at that Juror and knows that they do not want to follow this angry Juror down his path, the viewer watches the minds and thinking of the Jurors change, as the missing son Juror emotionally erupts in the room. After this error is stripped down to his bare beliefs the only truth is evident that he is missing is son! In Detroit the process of Juror selection is randomly selected people that live in the county and are a voter are put on a list that the State of Michigan of registered voters keeps.
Anyone who is a licensed driver or has a State issued ID, is also on this list. Any person qualifying with these certifications will be mailed a questionnaire along with a Juror summons to complete and return to court.
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan is divided into the following divisions for Juror selection purposes: Ann Arbor(6 constituents City (21 9 counties);Flint (4 counties) and Port Huron (5 counties). Democracy in all its finest points needs one major necessity to work, democracy needs people that want it to work all the time.
Democracy is a living and breathing Idea and will die with silent tongues and double standards. The notion of anyone that is accused of a crime and gets to tell their side of the offense to a Jury of their peers is not only a new thought but a concept that some have risked death to live under. Quite a few people take for granted the process of going to court even in civil matters and if you ask mom people the court system is a pot of stew filled with greedy lawyers and Judges that are on the take, only serving the needs of criminals and the poor.
Some people hold this notion and call themselves fourth of July celebrating Americans, and nothing could be further from the truth. FIJI(Fully Informed Jury Association) describes the duty of a Juror in these terms: “The primary function of an independent Juror is not as many think, many citizens think that a Jurors main Job is to dispense punishment to fellow citizens accused of breaking various laws, but ether a Jurors Job is to protect the accused fellow citizen from tyrannical abuses of power by government.
The United States Constitution guarantees all its citizens the right to a trail by Jury. This means that the government must bring its case before a jury of the people, if the government wants to deprive any American of its life, liberty or property the person accused has the right to a trail. Jurors can say no to the governments request of punishment by refusing to As seen in 12 Angry men some think that a simple non thinking vote of guilty is enough to suffice their Justice duty.
People may tell that it the government says guilty then it must be so, Perhaps they wish to get home for dinner or not miss the football game or concert to which they have tickets, they might even be worried about work that is piling up in the office in their absence. In the movie the viewer gets a glimpse of this kind of thinking and or mood, as the Judge is instructing the Jurors he has his hand resting on the side of his face with no 12 ANGRY MEN A STUDY real concern or enthusiasm for the instructions given the Judge is Just reading to the jurors in a tired robotic tone.
As the men walk into the Jurors room the mood conveyed is “Lets get this over with, we all know this kid is guilty because the law has said so and we all got life’s to get back too. Businesses to take care of, at first glance these men seemed very similar until they take the first vote, and then the first layer of their personalities are peeled away. As the first votes come in 11 for guilty and only one lone Juror (Found), not guilty you could see the look of betrayal on the other errors faces.
Fond’s character reminds us throughout the film that our rumbling tomcats, or special social events, even our workplaces pale in comparison to the possible damage done to another human being, wrongfully sent to Jail or on this case his death. A Juror cannot knuckle under, to peer pressure during Jury deliberations. This movie makes the viewer see that Jurors are not simply people taken away from their important ordinary, everyday lives but that at any moment 12 people can be heroes of Justice.
The viewer can imagine the minds and consciences of these men and through the process of active listening, start dissecting what is truth and what is pre -Judged guilt, many mimes the young defendant became the poster child for a whole community of degenerates. Words like “those people” and phrases like they all liars lets us see the hearts of some of these men. A quick and unthinking guilty verdict is not Justice it is the direct opposite.
When called upon to be a Juror we must summon the fortitude and resolve to maintain our voice as American citizens, even if that vote can’t convince others to agree with us.
A hung Jury is sometimes better for the defendant than a guilty verdict. Its not always a simple matter of someone being locked up in a arm room where the prisoner is taken care of as a human being sometimes Joe public, forgets that prisons and Jails can be extremely punishing environments. It seems that a lot of Americans love to wave a flag or sing the national anthem, but En it comes to serving on a Jury these same Americans start forgetting that Jury duty is really a privilege, many of us are often used to thinking of citizenship in a passive way.
To serve on a Jury and listen to the governments case against a fellow citizen is to actively be a serving citizen. The key role of leadership played an portent part in this movie, Juror number one is the foreman Juror he is seen as the leader in the film, he was in charge of the seating and how the voting should be handled but the viewer is also let in a little secret,presiding Juror/Juror number one is a very soft leader.
He is serious about his authority but seems uneasy about being tested on his authority. He is somewhat of a democratic leader.
This concept is backed up by Juror number one yelling that if someone else wanted to be in charge he would gladly step aside and let them be Jury foreman, when no one stepped up e resumed his chair. This type of leadership can lead to shared decisions being made the leader and the group. New ideas are more easily accepted Witt this type to leader.
When this leader is required to make a decision he or she usually explains the reasoning to the group. This type of leader must remember that authority itself Narrates a steady emotional state and fortitude to withstand criticism.
Juror number 2 has definite laissez-fairer leadership capabilities, this character is easily dismissed and timid, his thoughts are easily persuaded by the opinions of others. This type of leadership would not be very beneficial to a company, this type of leader Mould not make the hard decisions that a leader sometimes has to make, they would let whoever in the group was willing to make the decisions do it, resulting in sloppy Nor low production and little attention to details, usually morale and teamwork with this type of leader is low. Juror number 3 is an autocratic leader in many scenes he IS an antagonist to the constantly calm Juror #8.
Juror #3 is vocal about the simplicity of the case, and the easily obvious guilt of the defendant. He is quick to lose his emmer, and is given to emotional outbursts he is often infuriated when other Jury members disagree with his opinions. This type of leader could make a hostile and low morale work environment. Juror number 4 is a well-spoken stock-broker, lour number 4 likes to engage in unemotional rational discussions. This Juror shows transactional leadership with this type of leader he or she only wants unemotional bargaining relationship with their followers.
This manager wants everything followed by the book and this type of manager would only talk to an employee if they failed to meet performance objectives. Juror number 5 seems a little ashamed of the fact that he grew up in the slums but its this one fact of this Jurors life that helps a key point of the knife fight between the son and dad. He actually cements reasonable doubt for the defendant. This Juror would be another borderline laissez-fairer leader. We get insight of this Juror being afraid to express his opinion in front of older members of the group.
He seems to carry the shame of being from the same community as the pun defendant.
He would not make 12 ANGRY MEN A STUDY consistent leader and or manager especially if faced with someone older that he let had an prejudiced attitude toward his humble beginnings. Juror number 6 is dull but honest, in the film his profession is a painter and he is not afraid of speaking Jp for someone he feels needs defending this Juror would definitely bring a democratic leadership style to a company while probably not what senior management would be looking for this Juror would make a comfortable production manager.
I believe that the people that worked under him would feel empowered and loyal to their Job. Juror 7 is a sly and sometimes obnoxious salesman, he admits that he would have done anything to get out of Jury duty. This is Juror would be a true laissez-fairer leader he would not lead on commitments or decisions for the company.
Juror number 8 is the hero of this movie, he votes not guilty during the “hole film. Juror number 8 spends the rest of the day defending the young accused against outcries of guilt.
This Juror wants discussion and debate he is not to be pushed around by strong opposition, he is the type of Juror that the viewer hopes Mould be there for them if they are ever in the defendants chair. This Juror would be democratic leader that brings retirement power to the table en would use Douglas McGregor attitudes of theory Y and initiate structure. He would be an asset to the companies bottom line and workers that he managed. Juror number 9 a “mild, gentle old man, defeated by life and waiting to die.
But even with this bleak description, he is the first to agree with Juror #8, deciding that there is not enough evidence to sentence the young man to death. Juror 9 is also, the first to openly recognize lour #ass’s racist attitude, toward the defendant. Juror number 10 is the nightmare of the group his thinking is really the biggest threat 12 to American democracy in the whole film. While we watch the film Juror’s 10 bigotry to others is unleashed in a kind of prejudiced tantrum.
This Juror’s beliefs disturbs the rest of the Jury in a very tribal way, there is a scene almost at the end of the movie where most of the other Jurors literally turn their backs on him. Needless to say he would be an authoritarian leader, that uses the theory X attitude, he would feel that his subordinates would not perform their duties unless he watches their every move.
He would have very negative feelings for workers that were different from him This boss/manager would be very stressful to work for. Dervish would be very critical and could possibly open a company to a possible discrimination law suit.
