Assignment on 12 Angry Men

Submitted by Rakib Hasan Talukder

ID:1921040011
Submitted to Nasmin Jabin Noor (NJN)

Department of Law,North south university

Introduction:
Sindney Lumet directed the movie 12 angry men.The 12 Angry Men was realised in
1957.The movie presents 12 jurors that are challenged with the task of deciding the
case of an 18 years old boy.The boy was accused fir murdering his father.12 Angry
Men is an ood film and many states have since addressed the death penalty.But in
this film,if the boy proved guilty for his father’s murder,the judge would have given
the death sentence of him.The death penalty itself was a hot topic on that
time.Most of the person discussed about this matter.Some people supported the
boy and some people stand against him.So there was an argument between 2
parties.There was so many ethical issues on that case.When every juror said the boy
guilty one of them said not guilty but he was not sure about that.The juror want to
discuss about the metter and and said everyone to think again.And again he said the
boy is not proven guilty so we can’t call him guilty.In the rule of law suspect is
innocent until he proven guilty.Every juror’s mind was a thing that is,the boy is not
proven guilty.By the rupe of law the boy was innocent,if the juror think he is guilty
the court will sentence him to death.But luckily everyone changed their single
headed mind and ultimately the boy proved innocent and he came back from his
death penalty.We can see the positive ethical power on this movie in anyone work
with in ethical way he can change others negative thoughts too.Ethics can change a
person’slife also.

Story Of 12 Angry Men:

The 12 angry men presents ethical views of jurors.The movie features with 12
jurors,they are challenged with the task of deciding the case of a boy who was
accused of his father’s murder.They gave the challenge and they have to be agree
with one decision that the boy is guilty or not.If the decision of jurors proved the boy
guilty he would be sentenced the death penalty.At the very beginning of the film,the
11 juror agreed with the fact that the boy is guilty.But one of the jury disagred with
others decision.But he didn’tsay the boy is not guilty,he just simply said he is no sure
about the case.The boy can be guilty or not guilty.The jury said possibility is 50% on
both side.The one jury want to discuss about the metter and want to think about the
case but some others member don’t want to discuss.They thought discussion will be
waste of time because some neighbors stated on the court that they saw the
shadow of the boy killing his father with a knife and she heard the sound when the
train is passing.The women farther added she heard a sound of the accused boy ,the
boy was shouting “i will kill you”.11 juror said, everyone know how the boy kill his
father so they are not interested to talk about poor boy who killed his own
father.The juros were very angry because if everyone is not agree with the decision
they can’t go out from the jury board room.They call for a vote again now 3 person
said they are not sure about this case.Again others juror become angry the told that
don’t they remember that the boy said he was watching the movie when his father
was murder but when the judge ask him about this and ask for the name of the
movie.Unfortunately the boy forgot the name of the movie.And the other fact of the
case was,the accused boy was with the same knife by which his father was killed.So
they called for the vote again now it was 6/6 on both side.They have to discuss again
to manage others to trust their decision.But the men who was only the person said
the boy is not guilty show everyone a knife that was same as the murderer’s
knife.Everyone was shocked how is it possible.Then the juror try to manage them by
saying that the women heard the sound of shouting and on that time train was
passing so that is not possible to hear something when train passing behind so the
women lied she just want to be headline of newspaper.Another men said he
watched the boy killing his father but fact is his room was far away and he is not able
to walk fast so it is not possible come fast and see the boy killing his father.And then
one by one juror was changing their minds and they voted for the not guilty.Because
there is no strong evidence that can prove the boy is guilty.Because when everyone
think deeply they decided that not possible for the boy to kill his father if he killed
his father hw won’t shouted and don’t come again in the morning to his home
again.He will be far away from home.The prosecutor was the only problem he said
the knife was so unique and the boy’s friends saw him with the knife before his
father’s death.One juror proved that the knife was not that much unique he had a
knife as like as the murderer’s knife.So by that thing it was proved that murder could
be other person.The the evidence against the boy can’t directly hit him that he is
guilty.But all the evidence go back to this boy to prove him not guilty and the other
11 jury also measured by the evidence against the boy and it was proved that the
boy was not guilty.After a long discussionThe film ended with the final juror that
thought agreen with everyone.Everyone voted not guilty.

Ethical Views Of The Film:

Ethics is a moral obligation of deciding something.Ethics is something that cannot be
touched but the impact of ethics in humans life is huge.If anyone is showing the
good intentions but not doing well will be considered as unethical behaviour.On the
other hand if a person feel inside of him to do something that will be helpful and
that won’t hurt anyone can be considered as ethical behaviour.It can be measured
by own,suppose i’m doing something that may make trouble for others but helpful
for me.It can clearly seen that my work will make trouble for someone and already
know that making trouble for others is not ethical.In the film 12 angry men there
was some jury they don’t even know how to make a decision and it’s unethical to
come for making big decision without knowing about the case properly.Some of the
jury members only came for money,they just need the money from the government
bit they don’t have any concern what will be happen if they are makeing wrong
decisions.Some jury members came in the court just to be a headline of newspaper
and some members came to make a experience.Is anyone’s life is a joke? The boy of
the movie is poor is that the only fault that’s why he is not getting the fair decision.In
12 angry men it can be seen that 11 member hands up to vote guilty in first chance
and they don’t even think about the case.But there was a member he was jury
number 8 he didn’tvote for the guilty.Every jury asked him “do you think the boy is
not guilty?” the jury number 8 says “i’m not saying that the boy is not guilty,i'm just
unsure about the case.Maybe we should discuss about the case that will help us to
make a fear decision” . One of the the jury start shouting with him and try to force
him to vote guilty and finish the case as soon as possible because he want to quit
fast so that he could join the ball games.Than the jury number 8 says that it not
something easy to make a decision about anyone’s life.It's not like your ball game
where you can make any decision that won’t hurt anyone.The case about a person’s
life and we can’t take the matter as litely .The jury number 8 try his best to convene
everyone to discuss and think about the case.Some people was agreed with him
they start thinking about every small point of the case.But there was two jury who
was not interested to think about a poor boy who lives in a slum.They think that
every poor boy is bad.But other jurys try to make them understand that we can’t say
anyone bad or guilty unless he proven guilty.If you want to say the boy is guilty you
have to convince other juris with logic.If you are failed to convince others with your
logic than you have vote the boy is not guilty.In this movie in first few moments the
jury number 8 was alone.Everyone shouted to him but he tried his best to make a
discussion with that they can find out the actual and fair decision for the
boy.Because in the eyes of law, everyone has the right to get a fair trial.So we can’t
make any discrimination between poor and rich people.On the half time of the
movie almost every jury make change to their decision.The movie 12 angry men is
reputed because of jury number 8’s strong ethics.Other juris also shows their ethics
too but all of them my research says that jury number 8 is the best because he fight
alone against 11 angry jury for maintain his ethics only.Juris proved that discussing
every possible situation was really what changed the boy’s fate.
We can see here more person who were did unethical activity too.There was a
neighbor who was too old he could not see clearly but assumed that he saw
everything and hear sound of the boy while he was murdering his father.But it was
seem to be quit impossible to see or hear any sound from where the men was
standing.So it can bee seen that the men was lying just to get the public
attention.Another person who said the court that she was the boy’s neighbor
too.She said that after hearing sound he got out from his room and see the boy
running out after killing his father.But the point is the person is unable to walk
properly so how could he reached there so fast.So he was seem like a liar as the first
person.Their work is hiting the morality.Just seekiin public attention they are lying
even though they don’t think about the boy’s life.

Conclusion:
In conclusion,this is an old movie but it have got the highest rank in movie list
because it teach all of the viewer the ethial value and moral value.We saw a men
who was fight alone against everyone just for maintain his ethics and for his
morality.If the person number 8 who was the only jury showed his ethics don’t stand
with his morality I am afraid to say the court will sentence to death for this boy.If
everyone will have the same moral value as like the jury number 8 and everyone
would fight for the truth as like the jury of the movie 12 angry men the society will
more safe for everyone.And the coiurt should be awar about this,in which persons
hand they are going to giving the valuable cases.First of all court have to judge the
person after appoint them as jury.And he proved anyone can fight alone if he did
anything what is ethical. The moral of this movie is that in court, you are to be
considered innocent until proven guilty. There was no hard evidence tied directly to
the boy that proved he murdered his father.