9th Juror provides the possibility that the old man was only testifying to feel important. 9th Juror stands and admits to having changed his vote because he’d like to hear the arguments out.Ĩth Juror calls into question the validity of the testimony of the old man living downstairs. Immediately, the jurors turn on 5th Juror, accusing him of having changed his vote out of sympathy for the boy.
The vote is 10 “guilty” votes and 1 “not guilty” vote, and so the deliberation continues. They agree to this and vote by secret ballot. When a discussion about the murder weapon, which was identified as the knife purchased by the defendant, a “one-of-a-kind” knife, begins, 8th Juror surprises the others by presenting an identical knife he had purchased in a pawn shop two blocks from where the boy lived a few nights prior, shattering the claim that the knife was so unique and identifiable.Ĩth Juror makes a proposition that the other eleven of them could vote, and if all of them voted “not guilty,” he would not stand alone and would go along with their guilty verdict. 3rd Juror compares him to his own son, with whom he was estranged, and 10th Juror reveals strong racist tendencies against the defendant. There is a strong rallying against the defendant. Finally, the boy has an extensive list of prior offenses, including trying to slash another teenager with a knife. The boy had, that night, had an argument with his father, which resulted in the boy’s father hitting him twice.
#12 minutes plot summary windows#
A woman living across the street testified that she saw the boy kill his father through the windows of a passing elevated train. The boy claimed he had been at the movies while his father was murdered, but couldn’t remember the name of the movies or who was in them. Through this discussion we learn the following facts about the case: an old man living beneath the boy and his father testified that he heard upstairs a fight, the boy shouting, “I’m gonna kill you,” a body hitting the ground, and then he saw the boy running down the stairs. Ultimately, they decide to go around the table, explaining why they believe the boy to be guilty, in hopes of convincing 8th Juror. The jurors react violently against this dissenting vote. All of the jurors vote “guilty,” except for the 8th Juror, who votes “not guilty,” which, due to the requirement of a unanimous jury, forces them to discuss the case. Eventually, the twelve sit down and a vote is taken. All the jurors presume the obvious guilt of the defendant, whom we learn has been accused of killing his father. They complain that the room is hot and without air-conditioning even the fan doesn’t work. The men file in and decide to take a short break before deliberating.
After these instructions, the jurors enter. We learn that this is a murder case and that, if found guilty, the mandatory sentence for the accused is the death penalty. The play opens to the empty jury room, and the Judge’s voice is heard, giving a set of final instructions to the jurors. The play is set in a New York City Court of Law jury room in 1957.
0 kommentar(er)
