Lets a murderer walk free

lets a murderer walk free

He established reasonable doubt. If the prosecutors couldn't go beyond that that's on them.

Reminder the Lemmon TV remake is better

The point of the film isn't really whether or not what he did was right or wrong but rather that people are more motivated by appeals to personality than fact which ironically saved as much as initially condemned the defendant.

No he didn’t

But there was no reasonable doubt

dude, the female witness had little marks on her nose (which everyone definitely noticed from across the room and even remembered) which indicate she may use glasses, and since people take their glasses off at night she didn't see the crime properly

dude, the old man was limping at court so that means he lied under oath when saying it took him 15 seconds to reach the front door (it doesn't matter that he may have hurt his leg on the way to court). the old man is also lonely and needed attention so he lied to police because he was bored

dude, the knife being the same is just a coincidence

dude, this kid has been in knife fights before so he must be an expert and therefore he would never stab someone from this angle. even though we think he was panicked, we still think that if he did kill he father he would execute it perfectly

dude, it doesn't matter that the kid can't even name the movie he saw or that nobody recognised him at the theatre

dude, he just happened to lose his knife on the same night of the murder

Just layers upon layers of coincidences and excuses just enough to distort the facts so that a teenager with a history of assault and parental issues and fighting with knives is made to look innocent

I get that but if they wanted to go down that path they should have done more to indicate their 'not-guilty' verdict was about there simply not being enough evidence to convict the kid, especially given the punishment (electric chair).

instead the movie was kinda framing the kid like he was innocent. The people who had valid reasons to think he was guilty were gaslit one by one into believing the facts police gave were wrong. the movie did everything it could to brush off any valid argument about the kid being guilty as "hurr durr any juror who thinks the kid is guilty is just a racist or angry about his own family life"

Yeah you've presented means, motive and opportunity... uhhhh but our packed jury thinks you didn't go beyond "le reasonable doubt", ok?

Jury trials are a Frontier anachronism and don't belong in modernity, especially where every case is politicized and it's impossible to pick an unbiased juror

This.
He made completely unreasonable conjecture in his mind to handwave the facts of the case.
You could use his line of 'argument' to suggest that no murder actually took place and that the father fell over onto the knife.

The movie's premise and message raises the bar for evidence from 'reasonable doubt' to a virtually unreachable height. It's unabashed liberal propaganda aimed at fucking up the foundations of high-trust society such as inevitability of punishment.

The movie further hints at the kid being innocent in a subtle way. Everyone apparently misidentifying him and also not remembering him is a metaphor for people's attitudes towards and neglect of poor nonwhites at the time

yeah I can see how this movie is mostly about prejudices instead of actual logic. But they should have done more to frame it about there not being enough evidence to convict him, even though he most likely did it.

The movie doesn't genuinely try to admit that the kid might actually have done it. By the end of the movie it's just "if you think the kid did it, you're racist." None of the jurors at the end said something like "i think the kid did it and it's very likely he did, but there's reasonable doubt so I'm voting not-guilty"

The jury can’t make the case for either prosecution or defense. He went outside the court and introduced evidence like the knife which is not presented during trial and therefore inadmissible and the result of shifting a jury based on such evidence should invalidate their ruling. This is why juries are instructed to not read anything about the case because the press opinion or popular opinion is not part of the trial.
Y’know since you made a retarded appeal to procedure you may want to rethink what the procedure is there for.

This also comes up more explicitly in that new movie Juror 2 which has people acting detective and being present in clear conflict of interest.

Jury trials are a Frontier anachronism and don't belong in modernity

Careful what you wish for fucko, the vast majority of cases never reach jury trial. Routine plea deals has people pleading guilty to shit they don’t do because it’s also routine to threaten people who dare rock the boat and demand their constitutional rights with punitive measures in excess of any guidance to force a plea.
Further, bench trials are part of the system and can be requested. This means a judge will issue the verdict on the facts. You are not beholden to the jury system and it’s in fact a /right/ you’re being stripped from having. One important reason for juries to exist is to question unjust laws entirely.

It's a propaganda reel directed by a Jewish communist. The entire message is aimed at encouraging easily impressed retards to fuck up the judicial process if they ever get put on jury duty, especially non-whites, that's why it has been shown in schools so much

Unironically tho

One important reason for juries to exist is to question unjust laws entirely.

Yeah I can't wait to have an awesome unbiased jury of my peers packed with niggers to jam me up for 25 to life like they did with Chauvin for doing his job, while simultaneously letting their fellow niggers skate on murders

in that sense the movie is disingenuous. it's about dismantling prejudices more than it's about reason doubt. The 'not-guilty' arguments now can't be trusted to be of food faith since the movie takes the position that the kid is innocent and that every 'guilty' voter is an obstacle that must be defeated. This movie gaslights you into thinking you're a racist or resentful asshole for thinking this poor nonwhite kid is guilty

You could even say this movie is prejudiced towards the white working class

I agree this movie is liberal elite propaganda

The movie further hints at the kid being innocent in a subtle way

The movie's premise is so thin it's barely enough to fill a Twilight Zone episode, so to keep the conflict going the screenwriter ended up creating so much evidence and testimony in the context of the movie it's literally impossible for the kid to be innocent.

I'm not american but it's not shocking this is played at your schools. It feels like a government-funded infomercial trying to boost jury duty participation by making it seem exciting

Based.

Whole case hinges on a knife that's supposed to be one of a kind

Goes out and buys the exact same knife

Its not the jury's duty to bring up arguments for the defense

If the state wants to strip someone of their inalienable rights, the state should have to do their job first. They didn't do that.

The jury can’t make the case for either prosecution or defense

That is not how it works, retard. You don't have to prove that you are innocent in the court, it is the porsecution that has to prove that you are guilty.

the point of the movie was to show any criminal can be innocent if you just have an open mind

You don't have an inalienable right to a provocateur mole inside the jury that conducts extrajudicial private investigations and introduces new evidence past the prosecution and the defense during deliberations.

He didn't introduce new evidence. Jurors can't introduce evidence.

Finds a giant hole in the prosecution's case

Fellow jurors I have found a giant hole in the prosectution's case

NO YOU CAN'T DO THAT

One of the witness is old?

THAT'S IT I'M LETTING THIS KILLER GO FREE

how long until the schizo comes in and accuses everyone of being a Russian shill (?)

establishing reasonable doubt takes a good amount of reasoning to do. when u reason you try to make logical conclusion based on the available information. giving the circumstances there's no other logic than the kid did it, so in conclusion the the jury never managed to establish reasonable doubt because they never did use their reason as their arguments as a whole was illogical

He’s the joker.

12 Angry Man is a movie I tell all my friends to watch. It's a great test to see who's an extremist/racist or who's a cool fellow

The jury doesn't have to establish reasonable doubt, the prosecution does.

shots an unarmed woman to death

was let go totally free without even holding a proper trial because the prosecution thought that a random dude giving them a few bullets that had nothing to do with the case was not important to archive.

Is this how the law works or does it only work like this for the elite?
Like can you bomb an entire city and then if the prosecution does a tiny tiny screw up during the trial you are let go free? Wouldn't criminals and criminal networks abuse this like crazy?

forgot pic

giving the circumstances there's no other logic than the kid did it

Assuming your conclusion here, chap.

He did
Correct

It was the judge that made the decision she was compromised.

Le jury nullification

You have to outsource your thinking to the government!

Slave mentality.

Some great actors in that remake. Also found out Friedkin directed it.

exactly. growing up is realizing that the boy probably still did do it.

Retrial

You think someone could remember a movie they just saw moments ago? Well I bet you can't remember a movie you saw two weeks ago. HOW ABOUT THAT HUH

Juror 8's arguments made no fucking sense, if this movie came out as is without changes to the plot or dialogue you would be waiting for a twist at the end revealing that he was the actual murderer

all of those things you listed are reasonable things that could have happened, do you not understand what "reasonable doubt" means?

Theaters didn't even have listed start times for movies back then. Do you know the name of every movie that plays on your TV when you turn it to a random channel? How about when you just had your world turned upside down finding out your dad was murdered?

yeah I can see how this movie is mostly about prejudices instead of actual logic. But they should have done more to frame it about there not being enough evidence to convict him, even though he most likely did it.

liberals think discrimination is worse than murder, and they want everyone else to think this way for some retarded reason or they'll kill you

Liberals aren't killing anyone for being racist you fucking liar.

this is literally how World War I started.

some people from 100 years ago did a thing

Okay so then I can blame you racist shitheads for slavery? Shut the fuck up you retard.

all of those things you listed are reasonable things

No they aren't.

But there was no reasonable doubt

I have doubt and I'm reasonable.

Eat my ass.

What's unreasonable about them?

i mean this is normal in the US, you can even ask for money.
sometimes they bring that up here in the UK and even Guardian types laugh at the idea. it's just a silly, weird American thing.

but of course racists kill people, and people kill racists. whatever their political leanings. Die Hard 2 (or 3, whichever) that was the whole set-up.

Jews were really mad about that jewish pedo getting hanged and the jews who sold out the USA by giving Russia nuclear weapons getting the electric chair so they decided to subvert the entire concept of justice to now be about "feelings" instead of punishing the guilty.

And now it takes 20 years to put a multiple mass murderering rapist cannibal in the electric chair because of this type of propaganda.

we're all racist in a way right? against someone?

No. It's mostly you whiteoids thinking you're better than everyone. Africans got their own thing and you keep latching onto that shit, but at the same time you pretend all of africa is just one country instead of 30 or 50 comprising at least 1/3 of the world population.

being judge by 10 retards and not a professional judge

the cases hinges on theatrics and clown lawyers doing silly dances for the jury

The American justice system is a farce

whiteoids

don't lump us in together. i'm English but i barely have any Angle, Franco, or Norman heritage. still as pale as sheet.

imagine doing this to North Africans just because they all have dark skin. then they would beat the shit out of you.

Don't reply to bait, anon.

They're unreasonable because the kid is the only suspect that had motive, means and opportunity.

he offended me. i'm not letting that stand. i will feed the troll until he bursts.

I think my time away from Anon Babble gave me a better perspective on race.
I even had this dream where I was surrounded by all these different people.
Men, women, children. They were all singing and smiling and playing games.
And none of them looked like me, it seemed like every tribe from mother Africa was represented.
And through it all, I just felt this overwhelming sense of peace and I realized that this dream was more meaningful than most. It was more than just another dream.
So anyways, I told them all that the cotton wasn't gonna pick itself and when I woke up, I realized just how much we lost when slavery was outlawed. We lost each other.

who goes to the movies with the intention to not watch the movie?
how do you forget what you did at the time your father was murdered? ignoring emotional reactions, the first thought any social being thinks of when they hear such news is "what if", "why did I do this instead of that"

the george floyd case (+ many many more) proves otherwise. several cops got their life ruined by liberals, and for what?

casts doubt on every piece of evidence

NUH UH THAT'S NOT REASONABLE DOUBT HE WAS GUILTY I JUST KNOW IT

I swear you fucking midwits should all be sterilized, you argue like Redditors.

So it's reasonable to suspect that the dad knew no one else that wanted him dead, yet you're willing to call his one generation removed son a psycho gang affiliated monster?

I realized just how much we lost when slavery was outlawed

You're just upset you were born too late to buck break

12 Liberal Cucks

I don't like this film at all because it paints the whole jury as idiots. Are you telling me 12 men sat through the whole trial and bought every stupid evidence the prosecutor had?

this knife is unique! - wow that is true!

listen to this chick, she tells the truth! - yup, she looks nice without glasses, she's a good witness

the kid was molested! huh, I suppose he was!

Who turns on the TV with the intention to not pay attention to it?

turning on the TV is way easier and cheaper than going to the movies.

Do you understand what the passage of time is?

it's watching 12 angry men

At this point you're either pretending to be retarded to keep the thread going, or a genuine retard who doesn't know what reasonable doubt is supposed to mean

Hey this murder knife is a unique knife!

No lol I picked it up at a corner store

You are the retard

because of this man, some other innocent civilian prolly ended up being killed or raped by that clearly quilty foreigner

this
why does america let random nobodies to decide if you are quilty or not?
was propably a good idea in 1800s when everyone was white and only men were allowed for jury

MUH REASONABLE DOUBT

It was a literal paid juror who fucked up the case with "le doubt" too, just like in this movie. After getting off Gotti then proceeded to order 4 more murders before getting put away for good

Yes, these are definitely comparable and you definitely aren't a retard.
I lied. You are a retard.

The only difference between them is that in the real world the juror was bribed by the Mob to tank what was supposed to be an open and shut case, while in 12 Angry Cucks the Juror 8 character just comes across as a schizophrenic activist with his own agenda

why hasn't anyone made a 12 Angry Women movie?

The only difference between them is completely different circumstances

the kids italian

I wish I could murder myself and go rent free from the hung trial

Henry Fonda was a chad. He totally owned every actor in the movie and he knew it. His performance was pure. Never been anything better ever since then.

I like how they knew what position the father was when he got stabbed. He could've been on his knees or bent over but no, they simply assumed he stood straight up

He established reasonable doubt

That's not up to the jury, and Fonda should have been thrown out the second he pulled out the knife.

Fonda should have been thrown out the second he pulled out the knife

He should've been arrested because it's a fucking felony

why did Fonda stab the table? was it about being dramatic? why couldn't he say

hey fellows, look what I found

and calmly put the knife on the table

Dude what if someone else showed up with an identical knife? Even though no one except the defendant has a clear motive?

AND at the same time, the defendant just happened to forget what movie he watched that day?

AND he lost his knife also?

AND the lady across the street was lying for some reason?

AND the old man downstairs was also lying?

Dude have you considered that you might just be racist and biased?!?

All of these coincidences amount to very unreasonable doubt. No one could ever be found guilty of anything if that was the standard.

thats one of the only valid counterarguments. now compare it to everything else (buying it then 'losing it' on the exact same night as the murder)

you're also omitting that the juror found the knife after a few hours. he deliberately went out of his way to find it. He didn't just go to a random shop

you have to admit there is a chance it all could be true, and if you don't admit then you don't believe reasonable doubt exists

Man I so missed psychotic racist rants like this during the downtime

Any single one of those is enough to create reasonable doubt, especially the old man limping

it doesn't matter that he may have hurt his leg on the way to court

You're trying to use reasonable doubt in reverse

well it's possible the witness is reliable so we might as well convict

i got a summons bros... can i use what i learned in the movie and apply it in real life?

Just browbeat anyone who disagrees with you, and as a last result call them racist so that the other jurors shun them

what is wrong with you people? why does 12 angry men always bring out the worst from you? why can't we all just get along and agree that we should never ever inprison someone if there's any form of reasonable doubt?

That's not how math works. Let's say each of these events have a 10% probability of being true. Reasonable doubt, right? Well, for all of them to be true you would have a probability of (0.1)^6 which is a 0.0001% probability he isn't the murderer. If you can't convict someone on that then you can't convict anyone.

oh look at this guy, he comes running to our country and before he has time to catch his breath he starts telling us how to run things!

"There is no reasonable doubt"

Lists a bunch of easy explainations

Ok, then what i'm hearing is that the prosecution didn't establish BEYOND reasonable doubt. Like, if you have to draw reasonable conclusions yourself that the Prosecution didn't establish, then that's kinda on them.

Also, it's a kid with a public defender who probably wasn't interested in the case and probably didn't do a good job.

Meaning that the Prosecution didn't do his job, the Defence didn't do his job and you think that warrants "Beyond Reasonable Doubt"? Damn, no wonder your country declared Due Process to be illegal.

his is why juries are instructed to not read anything about the case because the press opinion or popular opinion is not part of the trial

Amerishits have such a stupid legal system, the whole jury concept is retarded and as much of whish-ful thinking as comunism.

"the jury will ignore the absolutely incriminating thing the defendant has just said"

the jury will not read anything about this high profile case that is being broadcast on all media outlets 24/7 for weeks/months

the jury consists of peers and not pre-selected individuals that the (((lawyers))) spent endless times of research on to get the most perfect group of invididuals to persuade for a win

it's blatantly retarded and only their presidential election voting systems comes close to the same stupidity.

GROUNZ!?

good luck finding an unbiased judge

reasonable doubt

more like unreasonable doubt, motherfucker was stretching it so far by the end he might as well just stated that the knife might have fallen from a knife transporting aircraft into the father's chest, afterall: IT'S POSSIBLE!

tfw no liberal jury to get me off scott-free

tfw no one is taking my OBJECTION: GROUNZ seriously

Henry Fonda sealioned them so hard.

The movie is a fucking midwit flick, Henry Fonda's sole argument for everything is that IT'S POSSIBLE that things didn't go as they were stated during the trial.
Well bucko, anything is possible. Maybe the father died of a heart attack and the knife fell out of the boys pocket into the corpse making it look like a stabbing? Maybe the guy with the limp is a world class sprinter and stabbed the dad and got hurt on his way back to his apartment hence the limp. Maybe the knife got thrown out of the passing train by a drunk hobo who is now four states away and the knife just so happened to land in the father's chest?

If you base your sole argument on possibilities and make them trump any thing that isn't 100% but only 99% likely you simply get nowhere.

Trials don't work like this in real life and that movie is nothing but propaganda made by some fucking comunist fuckhead to subvert the legal process and make midwit americunts pretend to be Henry Fonda should they ever find themselves on jury duty. A highly damning film.

you can choose to get a bench trial instead where a judge will decide, but it has the same risk since you're likely to get some biased piece of shit there as well.

if you're on trial for posting racist memes you'll probably want to take your chances of getting one or two Anon Babble chuds on the jury before putting your fate into the hands of a liberal gay judge with a blm pin on his chest. Both have their up and downs and in the case of the jury the song and dances of the lawyer might also work in your favour, hence why there's good and bad lawyers. Much harder to get away with shit if you're letting the whims of a sole professional decide over the entire proceedings.

The Greeks made something like it, it's called Assemblywomen.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assemblywomen

It would be interesting to revisit this movie after a packed jury lets Karmelo Anthony off the hook