Assignment Instructions: Please review and follow all instructions before beginning this assignment to avoid point loss.
Go to Google Browser. Copy-and-paste the below web address into the search field:
https://archive.org/details/12-angry-men-1997-jack-lemmon-george-c.-scott-hume-cronyn-tony-danza-crime-drama
Your assignment is to click on and watch this film (time 1:52:18), and take notes on it so that you can respond to the prompts in the assignment. Included is the cast of characters. Refer to each in your assignment by J-# and last name.
This film is about a jury that is to decide the fate of an 18-year-old Latino man that has been charged with capital murder, accused of having stabbed his father to death with a knife. He could face life in prison, or even the death penalty, if found guilty. The twelve men on the jury must unanimously decide his fate. Is he guilty of murder? Or is there a reasonable doubt of his guilt?
You, the viewer, won’t see the actual trial, so you will only be learning of it from what the jurors discuss in the jury room.
The film begins at the very end of the trial where the judge is giving the jury final instructions about its duties in deliberating the case. The jury is escorted downstairs to the jury room where they are to discuss the evidence that was presented at the trial and, hopefully, arrive at a unanimous and just verdict based only upon the evidence presented to them at trial. It won’t be an easy task.
To find the defendant guilty, each juror must find that there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt (PBARD) of the defendant’s guilt. To find the defendant not guilty, each juror must find that there is a “reasonable doubt” of the defendant’s guilt. If they do not come to a unanimous decision, then they are “hung” (“deadlocked”) and the judge will declare a “mistrial” at which time the defendant could be tried again by another jury if the D.A. decides to refile the murder charges against the defendant.
Type (or copy-and-paste) each prompt in bold before responding to each below in regular non-bold type. Do this for each prompt. This will allow you to stay focused on the prompt, and allows me to focus on what you are trying to answer.
Answer the prompts in narrative writing, not just a series of short bullet points. Write complete, well-written sentences, using proper English grammar and punctuation, etc. Please PROOF-READ your paper before you hit the submit button. It should be clear and coherent, and easy to understand.
I am looking for a robust and thoughtful discussion on the prompts that shows deep thinking, analysis, and reflection, not a quickly-typed paper just to “get by.” Stay focused on each prompt so that you don’t end up going off on some long passionate tangent which doesn’t really address what I’m asking for in the prompt.
I’m not looking for a “book report” where you simply go over the film scenes, taking up a lot of your time and typing space that adds nothing to the assignment. I’ve already seen the film and I know the scenes. I want to know how you are synthesizing the various parts of the film and how they relate to your responses. So, refer to scene examples briefly.
Imagine yourself as a 13th juror in this case, having heard the testimony and having seen the evidence at trial, and now sitting in on the jury room deliberation. A guilty verdict requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of guilt. A not guilty verdict means there exists some reasonable doubt of defendant’s guilt. Both must be based upon testimony and evidence presented during the trial. Review definitions of “proof beyond …” and “reasonable doubt of guilt.”
Prompts:
1. Vote Guilty or Not Guilty. Discuss the proof beyond a reasonable doubt of guilt or the reasonable doubt of guilt examples supporting your vote.
2. Explain how jurors #3, #5, #7, #10 may have been influenced by personal feelings and/or previous experiences in considering their votes.
3. What aspects of the case most swayed you in your voting decision, and why?
