Monday, March 2, 2015
6a
I feel that in 12 angry men their was a juror who stood out as more powerful and convincing then the others and that's juror 8 because he was always so confident in the non guilty verdict that he had to persuade other to that side to he used every piece of evidence he could find to back him up and through his determination he was able to persuade that whole jury to a non guilty verdict. I think it's imporant for us to persuade and push people to what we belive is right to especially if you have evidence to back yourself up.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with you when you say that Juror Eight was the person who stood out as more powerful and convincing. Throughout the play, Juror Eight was giving the other jurors reason to find the defendant not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In Act One, Juror Eight was the only person to vote not guilty. As the play continues, Juror Eight rules out the testimonies of the witnesses. For example, the woman who lives across the street and witnessed the crime through the El Train. She wears bifocals and when she was in bed and glanced out of the window, she couldn't have been wearing them because she was already in bed, stated by Juror Eight.
ReplyDeleteI too believe that juror 8 really stood out in the play. He started out as the juror who was against the rest of the jury but because of his opinions and very well put thoughts about the case he convinced the other jurors to be on his side.
ReplyDelete