I. Background

American Judicial System

Key Concept 1: Jury Trial

Why exactly “Twelve Angry Men”?

In 1898 the Supreme Court ruled: a jury of at least twelve persons for criminal cases.

Terms

grand jury vs. petit jury (trial jury)

hung jury (para. 79)

Selection of jurors: randomly among qualified population

What Roles Do Jury and Judge Play?

1. Jury

hear evidence: finder of fact

cross examination

careful deliberation

verdict: guilty vs. not guilty, no such a verdict as innocent. Why?

2. Judge

sentence

acquittal

Key Concept 2: Reasonable Doubt (para. 178)

What is reasonable doubt? What is the logic to rule a person guilty beyond reason doubt?

beyond reasonable doubt: It is the standard of proof required in most criminal cases.

It is the doubt that could arise in the mind of an ordinary, impartial, honest, reasonable and cautious person with reference to the guilt of an accused.

Innocent until proven guilty.

Key Concept 3: Burden of proof on the prosecution (para. 27)

On which part does the burden of proof rest in the American judicial system?

The prosecution bears the burden of proof.

The prosecution’s proposition must be proven to the extent that there is no “reasonable doubt.”

II. Text analysis

Structure

Detailed Analysis

Part I: Discussion

(1) When and where? Which city?

(2) Who was accused of what?

(3) Why did No.8 vote Not Guilty at the preliminary vote? What was his logic?

Beyond reasonable doubt

Part II: Discussion

(1) Why did jurors No.2–7 voted Guilty at the preliminary vote?

(2) What does the evidence against the boy include?

a) Eye witness(es)? (Who said what?)

b) Alibi invalidated, how?

c) Alleged motive?

d) The boy’s record?

e) The murder weapon?

(3) Do they make good jurors? What kind of personalities do they have? Please give textual evidence.

(4) How would you describe the mood in the jury room?

(5) What do you learn about American social ills in this part?

Part III: Discussion

What are the reasonable doubts raised by the jurors?

a) #1 The switch knife (58-93)

b) #2 The old man’s testimony (94-117)

c) #3 The boy’s return to the apartment (118-137)

d) #4 The old man’s another testimony (138-179)

e) #5 The boy’s alibi (180-204)

f) #6 The downward angle of the stab wound (205-229)

g) #7 The testimony of the woman across the street (230-267)

1. #1: The switch knife (58-93)

“I began to get a feeling that the defense counselor wasn’t conducting a thorough enough cross-examination. He let too many things go by, little things.”

(1) What does this observation of No.8 show? Or, why does the defense counselor behave so?

(2) What is the boy’s account of what happened at the night of the murder?

Quarreled with and got hit by his father

8 pm: left the house and bought a switch knife at a junk shop

8:45 pm: met and talked to friends in front of the tavern

9:45 pm: left his friends

10:00 pm: arrived at home

11:30 pm: movie

3:10 am: arrived at home, only to find his father dead and himself arrested

2. #2: The old man’s testimony (94-117)

(1) What is the old man’s testimony?

Heard the boy shouting and the body hit the floor

Ran to the door and saw the boy fleeing

(2) What are the contradictions?

An EL train was roaring past.

He reached the door in 15 seconds.

(3) Why does No.9 believe that the old man lied to gain attention? Is No.9 talking about the old man? What does it tell about the American society?

No.9 speaks from his own experience.

No, he is talking about himself.

American society: the old are marginalized and overlooked; born poor always poor?

(4) What does No.9 refer to when he says, “I’ve done it myself”?

3. #3: The boy’s return and yell (118-137)

(1) Who raises it?

(2) Is it logical?

a) If the boy had killed his father, he wouldn’t have gone back 3 hours later only to be...

b) We don’t mean it when we yell “I’m going to kill you.”

(3) Which juror(s) change(s) his (their) vote after this round?

(4) Why do No.5 and No.6 change their votes?

4. #4: The old man’s another testimony (138-179)

(1) What does No.4 think of No.3 when No.3 says, “I don’t see what you are going to prove there.”?

(2) Was it possible for the old man to cover 55 feet in 15 seconds? Do you have any doubt about No.8’s recreation of the scene?

(3) What does “He’s got to burn…” (para. 160) show about No.3?

(4) What will happen in a hung jury situation? What might be the problems of such a practice?

(5) What social problems does No.7’s comments about No.11 show? (para. 179)

(6) What is the historical context?

The Cold War

Immigration wave

Rapid economic development

5. #5: The boy’s alibi (180-204)

What do you think of No.8’s series of questions to No.4? What does it prove?

6. #6: The downward angle of the stab wound (205-229)

(1) Could the boy stab down into his father?

(2) What does Para. 116 show about No.7?

Different ways of voting:

By written ballot

By calling out the numbers

By a show of hands

7. #7: Testimony of the woman (230-267)

The danger of prejudice

“It’s always difficult to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this. Whenever you run into it, it always obscures the truth.”

(1) Why does No.8 turn to No.4 first?

(2) Why does No.4 change his vote?

Part IV: Verdict

Not guilty

Reasonable doubt

Burden of proof on the prosecution

Innocent until proven guilty

III. Reinforcement:

Discussion

1. The Advantages and Disadvantages of the Jury System as Shown in This Case

2. About a Play

– What makes a play difficult yet interesting to read?

– What is said before?

– Colloquialism & slang

– Incomplete sentence

– Indirectness/tone (irony, sarcasm, pun)

– Stage directions (body language )

– Loose use of pronouns

Language Features

– Legal terms

– Implication

– The tone: irony and sarcasm

– Colloquialism and slang