Introduction to Twelve Angry Men Mayfield

Agenda: History on Twelve Angry Men How is the Law Involved? ◦ History of Criminal Law ◦ Selection of a Jury ◦ Function of a Jury ◦ Law of Evidence Related issues and themes Setting the Stage: Responsibility, plot summary

History on Twelve Angry Men The play was inspired by the author, Reginald Rose’s, experience of jury service The 12 “Angry Men” are the individuals that make up a trial jury for the purposes of hearing a legal case and interpreting the facts, and finally returning with a verdict of either guilty or not guilty for the accused

History of Criminal Law Early Juries ◦ Trial by jury was brought to England in the mid 11 th Century (1066) ◦ In Medieval Europe, trials were usually decided by ordeals, where it was believed that God intervened, “revealing the wrongdoer and upholding the righteous”  i.e. Ordeal by Water: the person who was accused was “tested” in water. If the accused floated then it meant he/she was guilty (surfacing to be punished), and if the accused sank, it meant that he/she was innocent… ◦ In 1215, the Catholic Church decided that truth by ordeal was merely superstitious, and they needed a more credible system

Early Juries cont’d The first jury was made up of local people who were expected to know the defendant Jurors were to “say the truth” (nowadays it is called “deliberating toward a verdict”) By the 14 th Century, the role of the jury finally became that of judgment by evidence By the 15 th Century, trial by jury became the dominant mode of resolving legal issues, and it was not until centuries later that the jury assumed a more modern role of deciding on facts on that which is heard in a court of law

Selection of a Jury A large group of citizens are called to appear before the court for jury duty (usually receiving a letter in the mail) Each province and state (both Canada and USA) has its own qualifications for those who may be eligible to serve on a jury Universally, jurors must be: ◦ citizens of that nation, local residents, of majority age, of approved integrity (others must vouch for the “character” of that individual) Both the prosecution and the defense examine the jurors to determine whether cause for challenge in any particular case exists There are many disqualifications and exemptions from being a juror

Function of a Jury Whether evidence is properly admissible or not (allowed or not) is a question for the court, but the weight and credibility of that evidence is determined by the jury After the evidence has been presented, the two counsels, first the prosecution then the defense, “sum up” their arguments in a manner that is favorable to their own side The judge makes a charge to the jury about the rules of law applicable in that particular case and sends them off to deliberate Juries deliberate (consider and talk out the facts, arguments, testimony, evidence) until they reach an agreement (unanimous in criminal trial) and return to the court with a verdict as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant

Importance & Role of a Jury pajm6I pajm6I

Law of Evidence Burden of Proof ◦ Burden of producing evidence beyond all reasonable doubt (persuading the jury to believe) rests with the prosecution to prove guilt using: ◦ due process: a set of procedures designed to make sure that people are treated fairly by the government  based on the idea that a person cannot be deprived of life, liberty or property without appropriate legal procedures and safeguards

Relevance ◦ Evidence is relevant when it has a tendency to prove or disprove disputed facts  i.e. eyewitness testimony is relevant because it can prove an event happened Law of Evidence cont’d

Hearsay ◦ Statements made outside of court by someone who is not present to testify under oath at trial  One reason for excluding this evidence is because cross-examination can’t occur, which is the opportunity for one side to ask questions to that witness in hopes of refuting his/her information/credibility

Law of Evidence cont’d Witnesses ◦ Nearly all persons with knowledge relevant to the case can testify ◦ Expert witnesses can also be called on, which are experts in their field of work and can interpret findings, examine situations, forensics, etc.  i.e. psychologist, medical doctor, coroner

About the Play The play deals with the sensitive issues of prejudice and racism, relying heavily on the portrayal of stereotypes You must be alerted to the fact that the views of the jurors, as improper as they are (mid 20 th Century), did influence the jury system/decisions for many years This controversy emphasizes the play’s important theme of justice prevailing, even if one person stands up for what is right

Theme: T he Triumph and Fragility of Justice Three key elements of the Judicial system are demonstrated in the play: ◦ The defendant does not have to demonstrate his innocence. Innocent until proven guilty. ◦ The verdict must be unanimous since unanimity guards against a miscarriage of justice. ◦ The defendant can be convicted only in the absence of reasonable doubt. "It is better that a guilty man be set free than an innocent man be convicted.

Theme: Reasonable & Unreasonable Belief It is important to examine not only our own beliefs but also those of others. We must ask whether these beliefs are consistent with each other and coherent with reality as we best understand it to be. We must also examine our logic (way of thinking) and beware of our fallacies (deceptive, misleading or false beliefs) and prejudices (class, race, other). We often let our emotions govern our decisions more than unbiased logical reasoning

Setting the Stage The Charge to the Jury: Responsibility The film opens in a courtroom, wherein we see a young man who appears to belong to some ethnic minority. We soon learn that he is on trial for the murder of his father. The judge instructs the jury that their vote must be unanimous and that, if found guilty, the boy will face the death penalty. Cut to the jury room where the story takes place. An anonymous vote is taken where all the jurors vote guilty, save one...