Angry Men the Jury in Twelve Angry

¶ … Angry Men

The jury in Twelve Angry Men is not diverse in terms of ethnicity and gender, because it consists of twelve white males. The only diversity evident is with Juror 5, who has a social class-consciousness that is different from the other men due to his having grown up poor. This little "in" to the theme of prejudice is what helps Juror 8 eventually persuade the others that their hasty "guilty" verdict is based on prejudices rather than on the facts of the case. Moreover,, Juror 11 is also first generation immigrant, and this comes up later in as the jury deliberates.

Twelve Angry Men is squarely about personal bias. With the possible exception of Juror 8 (who might have personal biases of his own that did not surface in the trial), many men, especially Juror 10 but others too, have biases against people who live in slums and mainly Mexicans who live in slums. Juror 3 is biased personally against the defendant because he has preconceived notions about the father-son relationship. Several jurors have cognitive biases that prevent them from seeing the facts of the case, such as when Juror 4 fixates on the boy not remembering his movie alibi.

3. Tuckman's theory of group formation posits a forming, storming, norming, and performing stage -- with an optional fifth of adjourning, which is exactly the term used to dissolve a jury. In Twelve Angry Men, the adjourning stage is clearly defined, as is the forming stage. The men are placed together in the room during the forming stage. They are getting to know each other, and all but Juror 8 are eagerly avoiding conflict. Juror 8 therefore emerges as a leader. The bulk of Twelve Angry Men takes place during the storming stage, when Juror 8 leads the discussions. This stage dissolves into the norming stage, when Jurors 12 and 1 ultimately tip the count in strong favor of the not guilty verdict. Finally, a shift takes place in the performing stage when not just Juror 8 is leading the discussion.

4. When Juror 10 rants about the slums and the scums dwelling within it, the other members of the jury ostracize him by turning away from him physically. He had crossed the line of acceptable stereotyping, and the others were able to see that their own prejudices were manifest in him to an extreme. Another example of ostracism occurs right at the beginning of the film when Juror 8 expresses his belief to the chagrin of the others. He was going against the norm, which bothered them.

5. Groupthink was evident during at least the first half of the film, until the majority of the voters start to be swayed. At the beginning, none of the jurors seemed to care about their duty as juror except for Juror 8. It is soon revealed that at least two members (Jurors 9 and 11) were already thinking that the boy was not guilty.

6. Juror 8 (Henry Fonda) is clearly the gatekeeper in the movie. He is the one leading the discussion and he actively involves each and every juror member in order to achieve his goals while sticking to the point of this being about the boy's life.

7. As they deliberated, the group normative culture shifted from being one of not caring about the boy to caring about the principles upon which the American criminal justice system has been founded.

8. Who were the leaders you observed in the film in each of these categories: Positional, Influential, Task, Maintenance and Self-Serving? Use the handout provided in class if you need help defining these leadership categories.

Positional = Juror 1, who is the foreman

Influential = Juror 8

Task = Juror 8

Maintenance = Juror 8

Self-Serving = Juror 7 at first, and then Juror 3

9. Roles:

Juror 1 -- Avoider (he is the foreman but is not a strong leader and avoids conflict throughout)

Juror 2 -- Help seeker (he is self-deprecating)

Juror 3 = Blocker (he remains negative and antagonistic throughout the film as if he is doing it on principle; he yells at Juror 8)