Juror 8 And The Antagonist In 12 Angry Men
“The Dispute of a Jury”
All jury’s have their differences, although they are not all the same. There are many opinions that float among a jury room. The votes and opinions vary with juror 8 and juror 3 as all of the jurors discuss the trial of the Hispanic boy accused of 1st degree murder of his own father. Votes, reasons, attitude, and biased feelings make up this particular jury. The protagonist in the jury room, juror 8, and the antagonist in the jury room, juror 3, both back up their opinion as to whether or not the Hispanic boy is guilty or innocent. The jurors reasoning behind their opinions are based on facts and details from the trial and are very logical and believable. Juror 8 and juror 3 both try to persuade the other jurors with their reasoning and they both believe strongly of their opinion. The protagonist and the antagonist have many more differences than they do similarities; this brings the dictation to last for many tense and hostile hours. …show more content…
All of the jurors except for the protagonist vote the Hispanic boy guilty. The jury cannot be a hung jury; it must be either all guilty or all innocent. Juror 8 believes that the rest of the jury is too positive and quick to vote and has a doubt in his mind that the boy could be innocent. Juror 3 on the other hand has determined that the Hispanic boy is guilty and will not allow any juror to change his decision. Juror 3 does not listen to any loop holes or possibilities of the Hispanic boy being innocent and is very straight forward with facts and believes everything being said in the
All jury’s have their differences, although they are not all the same. There are many opinions that float among a jury room. The votes and opinions vary with juror 8 and juror 3 as all of the jurors discuss the trial of the Hispanic boy accused of 1st degree murder of his own father. Votes, reasons, attitude, and biased feelings make up this particular jury. The protagonist in the jury room, juror 8, and the antagonist in the jury room, juror 3, both back up their opinion as to whether or not the Hispanic boy is guilty or innocent. The jurors reasoning behind their opinions are based on facts and details from the trial and are very logical and believable. Juror 8 and juror 3 both try to persuade the other jurors with their reasoning and they both believe strongly of their opinion. The protagonist and the antagonist have many more differences than they do similarities; this brings the dictation to last for many tense and hostile hours. …show more content…
All of the jurors except for the protagonist vote the Hispanic boy guilty. The jury cannot be a hung jury; it must be either all guilty or all innocent. Juror 8 believes that the rest of the jury is too positive and quick to vote and has a doubt in his mind that the boy could be innocent. Juror 3 on the other hand has determined that the Hispanic boy is guilty and will not allow any juror to change his decision. Juror 3 does not listen to any loop holes or possibilities of the Hispanic boy being innocent and is very straight forward with facts and believes everything being said in the