The 9th among the 12 Juror's is an old Man whose matured & impressive memory, the role played by Jack Warden decides to change his vote, because of the sane reasoning as put forth by the 7th Juror, played by Henry Fonda in support of the accused as not-guilty. Juror 9 changed his vote in favor of Juror 7 because of his stand which would put an 18 year old boy on Death Row by an unanimous decision of the 12 Jurors if voted guilty.
Therefore as a worldly-wise & keen observer of the proceedings in the Court, he weighs the pros & cons, deciding to vote in support of the accuse as not guilty, turning the vote count to 2 not-guilty against the majority 10 Jurors voting him guilty. There are several remakes, but the story & the characters r the same but with different actors. My Answer is based on Sidney Lumet's directorial debut with "12Angry Men" released in 1957. This Courtroom drama was adapted from a teleplay of the same name by Reginald Rose who co-produced and wrote the screenplay for the movie.
Yes. He was the 6th juror to vote not guilty.
in the beginning of act 2, the 12 jurors learn that someone changed their vote from guilty to innocent. juror 3 demands to know who changed their vote so he yells at juror 5 because he thought he did it. it was actually juror 9
Juror 5 gets mad after the second vote, when Juror 3 accuses him of being soft and changing his vote. It turns out Juror 9 (the old man) was the one to change his vote.
the first to change it is juror 9
because he was a war man he loved to fight
The 12th juror in the play 12 Angry Men originally believes that the boy is guilty. He later changes his vote to not guilty following the deliberation.
Juror #1o agrees with juror #12 and changes his vote to Not Guilty without any hoopla attached. You may have the number wrong for the juror you are attributing the quote to.
After the Preliminary vote, the results were: Eleven voting in favor of Guilty and one hold-out (Juror #8) for Not Guilty.
The first vote was 11-1 against Henry Fonda. So all the others changed their vote.
Juror #8 is the first and the only person to vote not guilty in the first round of voting. The role of this juror is played by Henry Fonda.
The first time it was at the beginning of the play and Juror #8 is the only one to raise his hand to vote "not guilty".The second time it was after they saw the knife and it was a secret ballot. Juror #8 said he was not going to vote and if there were 11 "guilty"s then Juror 8 would change his vote, but Juror 9 voted "not guilty".The third time was after Juror 8 reenacted the old man's walk down the hall and Juror #3's and Juror #8's little tussle. Jurors 2,5,6,11 vote "not guilty".The fourth time was after the knife scene and Juror #7 changes his vote because he was "sick of this whole thing". During this vote Jurors 1 and 12 change to "not guilty".The fifth time wasn't really a formal vote and it was after they demonstrated that the lady couldn't see without her glasses. Juror #8 asks "does anyone think there still is not a reasonable doubt?" and no on said anything except for Juror #3.The end of the play was when Juror #3 changed his vote.So 5 times.
Twelve Angry Men does not have a set protagonist or antagonist. It is referenced as a "gang drama." A gang drama's resolution occurs when everyone cooperates and comes to a general consensus. There is technically no protagonist, but the closest thing to it is Juror 8. He is arguing for the life of a boy that may or may not be guilty. The real conclusion to the book lies in the fact that everyone was able to settle with a unanimous vote.
Because the boy arrived home after the incident, which people wouldn’t normally do in that situation
They believed the accused was genuinely guilty.
Henry Fonda & Jack Lemmon
In his house
The climax is when juror #9 explains to the rest that the woman across the street couldn't have seen the crime just casually looking out her window from bed without her glasses. (cuz no one wears their glasses to bed.) Previously, juror #4 said that her testimony was good evidence, but after #9 disproves this, only #3 is left voting guilty. This is the climax because at the beginning of the play, all but one (#8) of the jurors vote guilty. But at this point, all but one vote not guilty (#3).
They can't vote, be a juror, or get a good job!!
That all other jurors vote for guilty or not guilty, and he will abstain (not vote). If everyone votes guilty, then they will put guilty as their verdict. If not, the jurors will talk about the case more.
Juror #7 had a hidden agenda. He wanted the court case to be over and done with as fast as possible so that he could attend a ball game. He even went as far as to change his vote to not-guilty claiming he was "sick of all the talking." But what he really wanted was to speed up the proceedings.
The legal system does not specify any educational standard for jurors. Anyone who is qualified to vote is qualified to be a juror.
the knife. they thought it was unique 'til Henry Fonda brought own one that was exactly the same.
they changed their focus because they think it is not fair that women get to vote.