12 Angry Men Jury Analysis

Words: 1789
Pages: 8

Jurors see the trial from the eyes of a viewer viewing a debate contest. Often, viewers viewing a debate contest choose the team that is presenting their previous views and beliefs. Viewers often stick with their teams throughout. Jurors watch a trial, and focus on which eye witnesses are more truthful and which expert witnesses have more expertise or are more accurate, to choose their team and stick with it throughout. Eye witness testimony is important to jurors. Team players, including witnesses could cause you to win or lose a case, because jurors evaluate witness testimony and witness honesty. When jurors trust an expert witness or an eye witness, his team is likely to win. Cross-examining any witness whom the viewers trust is a risky endeavor, because the viewer may increase their belief in the …show more content…
At Wild’s trial for accomplice in crime his defense attorney says, “he underwent ‘rigorous and demeaning cross examination on the part of Christina Gutierrez.’” His cross-examination was unfair, and therefore he should be given a lighter punishment. Wilds in the end does not have to go to jail. Each piece of evidence helps, especially if the judge listened to any of the court records, it may have arouse sympathy for Wilds because of Gutierrez’s aggressive tone as we hear in the recording in Serial. This may have saved Wilds from going into jail.
Therefore, jurors may not be the best people to decide whether or not someone is guilty; there should be experts who make the decision. The detectives should come down and testify, and the experts should ensure that the different stories match up and whether the mistakes are careless or standard. If experts find him innocent they should give some guidance as how to find the true criminal. It is dangerous to have a potential murderer running around, even if he might be innocent, so he must be caught