Hovda Post 1: 12 Angry Men

In the video, this is part of a court case pertaining to the murder of a man and the movie, 12 Angry Men, in its entirety is following the 12 jurors as they work to decide amongst themselves if the defendant is either guilty or innocent of killing his father. This particular scene is one of them standing strong and arguing that the defendant might not be guilty by producing a similar knife to the one in evidence that was in the possession of the defendant when the event took place. He is not proving whether or not the the boy committed the crime but instead is ruling out that him being guilty is the only option.

This scene is a decent representation of the court scene in reality. In order to be found guilty, the defendant must be found guilty without reasonable doubt. By the character in this clip saying that ‘it’s possible that there could have been a different murder weapon’ he is casting a reasonable doubt and is doing his duty as a juror by trying to examine all of the facts provided for them before coming to a final decision. In order for a person to be found guilty by a jury of their peers, they need to come up with one unanimous agreement. So, by not blindly agreeing with everyone else that believes the knife in possession is indeed the knife that was used in the murder he is in turn causing the rest of the jury to look at all of the facts and the event in different perspectives before making their final decision. This movie also highlights the importance of jury duty and understanding that one’s emotions or circumstance should not cloud their decision-making process. Some do not understand why the role is so important and why there are so many factors to consider when being apart of a U.S. jury (i.e. cannot know the defendant, have a clean felony record, and being proficient in the English language) but it is all due to the term “due process” where an individual has the right to receive a just and equal hearing.

Five discussion questions for my students:

1. What are some things that you would consider to be reasonable doubt?
2. Do you agree with the number of people it takes for a jury to come to an agreement? Should it be more/less?
3. What kind of cases wouldn’t have a jury, if any?
4. Give an example of what due process DOESN’T look like?
5. What is one instance where your emotions or circumstance got the better of your decision-making process? Was this something that was easy to overcome?

I had a hard time thinking of something to write about, but I wanted to write something about how the court system works, and this is more likely something that kids hear more about than anything else in the courtroom. This is also a topic that can be and is taught at a high school level, so this would be great to use in the future.