Over the film, there may be seemingly several “leader” over the jury as according to Nick’s definition of a leader being there were multiple influences and instances that persuaded the decisions more. Initially the case is composed of a biased and opinionated jury that is practically unanimously convinced the defendant is responsible. Throughout the landscape, there is a slow but sure change of mind over the jury since the leading part, Juror #8, successfully persuades the various other jurors who have initially the best performer the young man guilty of killing to further look into and look at the fact which in turn eventually causes the verification and arrangement of reasonable doubt among the jury.
Juror 8’s effective followership was best symbolized by his consistent way and strategy to the discord that initially had no person even hearing. Juror almost eight knew what he was standing for, appropriate justice, possibly in the face of difficulty as he was challenged by simply everyone within the room and his willingness and courage to believe the responsibility and challenge the assumed (198). He is likewise seen as a leader of the group through the honesty and integrity he displayed simply by “acting in accordance with solid moral principles” (41) as well as a drive to reach an honest verdict by convincing the group to look at all the possibilities despite the apparent and assumed.
Juror 3 would finest be classified as a great alienated fans as his prejudice against the defendant clouds his wisdom, placing a opinion on how come he thinks the boy is responsible. As it works out, his personal son that he hasn’t seen to get 2 years acquired grown up challenging his authority and rejecting his morals providing the basis for the anger that is displayed and so stubbornly until the very bitter end. While alienated enthusiasts “are able, they emphasis exclusively on the shortcomings and still have experienced challenges and obstacles” (195) as did Juror 3 once initially, he previously convincingly and mindlessly convinced the others with the defendant’s guiltiness as a result of the anger he felt from the bitter romantic relationship he had together with his son.
Juror 10 may most definitely become classified because conformist follower as his stubborn belief in the defendant’s guiltiness was supported by a mindless and intolerant discussion supported by his racist, bigoted comments. Initially Juror 15 willingly took part in in the heated up yet certain discussion because there was tiny doubt about the defendant’s guilt and conflict just visited a minimum. While the furniture turned and tension flower, Juror 12 found him self “concerned with avoiding conflict” (195) and became less of the contributor towards the conversation.
Much like Juror 8, in any condition in which there is an uncertainness or uncertainty present, specifically regarding a conclusion with this sort of major ramifications such as the one particular presented to the “Twelve Furious Men”, We find it highly necessary to even more investigate and take all things into consideration prior to coming to a decision. The suspicion of shady, sketchy behavior with the CEO is to be examined and reviewed very much the same that Juror 8 gone about asking yourself the thought “facts” and looked at each of the possibilities.
We can write an essay on your own custom topics!Check the Price