You are on page 1of 2


Being the person in charge of handling the jury discussion, he does a good job
performing his role but as the story progresses his authoritarian way starts
fading away. Although he stays organized tracking the votes of the jurors, he
gets irritated and frustrated when there is an objection to his control which
hampers his leadership abilities.
As a member of the jury who should be firm and reasonable enough, this person
gets swayed away easily and his next actions are based upon his previous
conversations. Apart from being a helping hand in the time calculation, his
presence seems irrelevant since most of the times he goes along with the
majority and doesnt have an individual standpoint.
He is the last person to change his vote because of the illusion created in his
mind because of previous facts. He forces his views upon others as well as
intolerant to other peoples which makes him an arrogant, stubborn and
pessimistic person. Also his thoughts are influenced by his past and family.
He is the only man in the group who firmly believes in facts and concerned with
logic. He comes across as a person who does not sweat in the heat, but his
judgement is finally overridden at the eleventh hour, due to which he could not
support his own strong opinions and arguments.
Coming from a lower class slum background, he feels afraid to stand up to elder
people in the room. But when he does, he could not resist the reasonable doubt
created by the knife handling incident which makes him stronger as a jury
In general, this member stays very silent and allows other people do the
discussions. He speaks up occasionally when things strike him. His decision
making process is very slow and takes a lot of time to listen and act.
Obsessed with other important things other than the jury, this member blows
away with the wind. He is short tempered and does not implement logic to form
his opinions which is represented by the fact that when the votes start increasing
in favour of not guilty, he changes his vote so that he could move quickly from
the room.
This member plays a very important role from the beginning till the end. The
point at which he votes not guilty seems very appreciating and courageous. He

convinces the whole jury in a matter of hours because of his good ability to
process thoughts in a clear and effective manner. Although people try to override
him, but he stays in his determined position and enacts events of the crime so as
to give a clear understanding to the members. In the process, he gradually
changes other peoples perspectives too, which play a very great role in the
acquittal of the boy.
The oldest member in the jury seems timid partly because of his long life. But
the way he sees things quietly and comes to a conclusion makes him insightful
which is also supported by the fact that he was the first person to change his
vote to not guilty.
Being an angry and bitter member, he pays no importance to the 18 year old boy
and shouts out racist and intolerant comments throughout the discussion. He
does not pay heed to other peoples changing their decisions, but in the end
because of his repellent attitude, he is segregated from the whole group, which
forces him to change his decision.
Being a immigrant form Europe and after seeing much injustice, he asks too
many questions which is good but he does not do anything other than asking
questions. He analyses the crime scene very carefully and puts up questions to
other members when their facts seem false. His faith in the democracy prevents
him from comprehending facts as a jury.
The most distracted person in the jury always thinks of business and has no
value to the understanding of people. He does not even understand the rare
questions which are put up to him. The ground upon which he decides his point
of view always seems shaky and indecisive.

Abhishek Saraswat