12 Angry Men (1957)

Question

1) What are these 12 jurors deliberating about in this movie?

2) What happens in a jury if the jurors don’t all agree?

3) A jury may not have __________ _____ if they are going to deliver a guilty verdict.

4) In court, evidence against the defendant must be beyond a reasonable doubt. What is reasonable doubt?

5) What are some of the issues with the evidence in the trial this jury is struggling with?

6) What are the most persuasive pieces of evidence in favor of the defense?

7) Opinion: Do you think the defendant was guilty or not guilty?

8) Do you think the case should have resulted in a hung jury? Why or why not?

9) What are some of the important messages we can take from this film?

Answer 1

1) In "12 Angry Men," the 12 jurors are deliberating the guilt or innocence of a teenage boy accused of murdering his father. The film explores their discussions as they consider the evidence and testimonies presented during the trial.

2) If jurors don’t all agree on a verdict, it can result in a hung jury, which means they are unable to reach a unanimous decision. This may require a retrial of the case or may lead to the prosecution reconsidering how to proceed.

3) A jury may not have reasonable doubt if they are going to deliver a guilty verdict.

4) Reasonable doubt is the standard of proof used in criminal trials, meaning that if there is any doubt in the jurors' minds regarding the defendant's guilt that is based on reason and common sense, they must acquit the defendant. It does not mean there must be absolute certainty of innocence but rather that the evidence against the defendant must be strong enough to eliminate doubts.

5) Some issues with the evidence in the trial that the jury struggles with include the reliability of eyewitness testimonies, the inconsistency of the testimonies presented, and questions regarding the physical evidence, such as the murder weapon and the timeline of events.

6) The most persuasive pieces of evidence in favor of the defense include the witness's questionable credibility (the elderly man and the woman across the street), discrepancies in the timeline of the events, and the fact that the murder weapon was demonstrated to be a unique type of knife that the defendant likely wouldn’t have had access to.

7) Opinion: This is subjective, but many viewers might conclude that the defendant was not guilty due to the reasonable doubts raised during deliberations regarding the evidence against him.

8) Whether the case should have resulted in a hung jury is also subjective. Some might argue yes, given the reasonable doubts present, while others might believe the majority's initial inclination toward guilt, based on their interpretations of the evidence, could justify a conviction.

9) Important messages from the film include the significance of reasonable doubt in the justice system, the need for thorough and impartial deliberation, the impact of personal biases on decision-making, and the moral responsibility of jurors to ensure that justice is served fairly and thoughtfully. The film emphasizes the importance of civic duty and the potential consequences of a rushed verdict.