Film analysis

Although this film possesses many underlying themes that deal with a variety of complex issues,
one of the greatest takeaways is that anything is possible.

Towards the beginning of the film when considering the possibility of the accused being not
guilty, Juror #8 says, “It’s possible isn’t it?” All it takes is reasonable doubt of one man, one man
who stood alone against a room of men convinced that this boy is guilty. “It’s not easy to stand
alone against the ridicule of others.” — Juror #9. It seemed impossible for one man standing
alone against 11 jurors who are more than convinced that the defendant is guilty, to convince
them all to hear his side and eventually get them to vote not guilty as well. You may think to
yourself, “There’s no way this guy will win. There’s no way they all vote not guilty.” But just
like Juror #8 says: It’s possible, isn’t it?

When in a negotiation involving a court case, there are many disadvantages. One of those
would be the reliability of the information received. Often opposing sides could give evidence to
prove or disprove each other’s points. In this agreement, the jurors acted out the murder scene in
multiple scenarios until they found an alternative possibility. Testimonials can be heard in the
court room but once in the jury room there is no way to find out anything else from them. The
decision is also based on if you deem the witness as a credible source. By creating the source of
“reasonable doubt” they are acknowledging that what they are saying may not be true but they
feel more confident using their knowledge and clear facts to make a decision. 12 people with
different opinions can be very effective because no individual solutions are effective when
compared to the cooperation of 12 minds takes place. Negotiations should work in the sense that
when a positive relationship has been created a good agreement can be reached. The majority
holds more power over the l juror alone. The 8th juror stands by his decision and uses reasoning
and analysis to break through to conclusions. The problem with power in a jury means that it can
sometimes be seen as control and having loss of control from one side to the other can divide the
jury. The 8th juror realizes that he must try to regain the power to argue his point, but uses only
reasoning to support his claims.

Ethics and the legal profession

When we speak of the decline in "ethical" standards, we should not use the
term 'ethics' to mean only compliance with the Ten Commandments or other
standards of common, basic morality.....A lawyer can [adhere to all these
requirements] and still fail to meet the standards of a true profession,
standards calling for fearless advocacy within established canons of service.
It is also the case that the lawyer has divided loyalties - owing a duty to the
court while at the same time owing a duty to the client. This is where legal
ethics comes in. A commitment to legal ethics involves a commitment to the
introduction of Codes of Ethics or Standards of Professional Practice.

In any case, the lawyer who acts in accordance with a professional code of ethics may
still be engaging in unethical practice.

So why is ethics important to the practice of law?

First because lawyers are integral to the working-out of the law and the Rule of Law
itself is founded on principles of justice, fairness and equity. If lawyers do not adhere
and promote these ethical principles then the law will fall into disrepute and people
will resort to alternative means of resolving conflict. The Rule of Law will fail with a
rise of public discontent.

Second, lawyers are professionals. This concept conveys the notion that issues of
ethical responsibility and duty are an inherent part of the legal profession.

The challenge before the legal profession....is to resolve the basic paradoxes
which it faces....To reorganise itself in such a way as to provide more
effective, real and affordable access to legal advice and representation by
ordinary citizens. To preserve and where necessary, to defend the best of the
old rules requiring honesty, fidelity loyalty, diligence, competence and
dispassion in the service of clients, above mere self-interest and specifically
above commercial self-advantage.

Third, because lawyers are admitted as officers of the court and therefore
have an obligation to serve the court and the administration of justice.
And finally because lawyers are a privileged class for only lawyers can, for
reward, take on the causes of others and bring them before the courts.