Name: Section: Evaluating An Argument Essay Directions: The following argument essay was written by a third year law student at the University of San Francisco. It is an analysis of Twelve Angry Men. Although this essay is clearly longer than the 5- paragraph version you have learned this year in English class, it still follows the same basic format which just goes to show that what you learn at middle school WILL ACTUALLY HELP YOU succeed in your life. As you read Mark Nunez s essay interactively, look for the parts of an essay that you have learned about. Twelve Angry Men by Mark Nunez Before writing this essay, I casually asked a friend what her thoughts were regarding the jury system in our country. She laughed and replied, "It doesn t work. Everybody knows it s just a joke." Changing the subject, she asked: "So, what are we doing after dinner?" My friend s conclusory statement bothered me. She obviously presumed that I embraced what she perceived as the majority view and that, therefore, the subject did not merit further discussion. I had just finished watching Twelve Angry Men and thus felt inspired to challenge what she hastily regarded as settled. Twelve Angry Men is a wonderful film that dramatizes the "imperfections" inherent in the American jury system. Simultaneously, it delivers the powerful message that because we are human beings and not machines, it is in the nature of things that justice demands such a system. Imperfect or not, it s the best we ve got. At the outset, eleven jurors vote in favor of convicting the accused without even discussing a single shred of the evidence presented at trial. Only one brave juror refuses to vote. He openly admits that he does not know whether the accused is guilty or innocent and that he finds it necessary to simply talk about the case. What follows is not only a discussion of the particular facts of the case, but an intense examination of the personal baggage that each jury member brings to the room. It s great that the play is not overtly critical of the fact that the juror s personal baggage is not checked at the door. Many critics argue that the jury system works against justice because a jury is not trained to distance itself from a case in the same way that a lawyer or judge is trained to do. On a certain level, this argument makes sense. At least it s a rational argument. However, how is it possible for human beings to check their lived experience at the door? Is it necessarily "bad" that jurors examine the evidence through the unique filters with which they view the world? After all, are they not called upon to speak on behalf of the diverse community in which we live? These are key questions Twelve Angry Men begs us to ask. They re good questions because they force us to reevaluate our thinking before hastily reaching the conclusion that the system doesn t work or that it amounts to nothing more than a mere joke.
The film also does a great job of not being overtly critical of the fact that some people merely follow their "gut" when it comes time to cast their vote. One particular juror in Twelve Angry Men votes in favor of convicting the accused. When challenged, however, he readily admits that he doesn t know why he thinks that the accused is guilty. This man s character is used as a vehicle to expose a serious flaw in the system. We see that sometimes jurors completely abandon reason. Many critics advance the rational argument that the power of a juror to decide one way or another for no apparent reason cannot possibly work to achieve justice. However, the film also exposes us to those jurors in the room who openly express their thoughts, ideas, and feelings about the case. This juxtaposition of characters in the jury room is ultimately consistent with the fact that the room should reflect the diverse community in which we live. Still, what happens when the jury doesn t understand the legal definition of murder? In Twelve Angry Men we never see the jury review or discuss a single jury instruction. Instead, we see that the jury is motivated by the facts and their own sense of drama. Ultimately, they reach a consensus based on a combination of the facts and their own personal baggage. Thus, the film raises yet another thought-provoking question: Does the power of the jury to go its own way warrant abandoning the system altogether? After seeing Twelve Angry Men, my view is that, although the system is imperfect, justice can still be achieved. We breathe a sigh of relief when we see that one man is willing to challenge what eleven other jurors have regarded as settled at the outset. We see that the system works and think justice is achieved when this man s uncertainty and reasonable doubt slowly but surely become every man s uncertainty and reasonable doubt. In the final analysis, we all pull for that one courageous man who instigates the doubt in the room and opens the eyes of the blind to the truth. Thus, abandoning the system altogether is not the answer. Maybe we re supposed to walk away from Twelve Angry Men with a better understanding of how unrealistic it is to expect the human element to remain completely independent from the rule of law. Perhaps we leave the film with ideas for jury reform to make the system less imperfect. Maybe some of us think jurors should be paid a decent salary so as to motivate them to dutifully fulfill their civic duty. Maybe some of us think that a jury should consist of a panel of judges, a group of distinguished citizens, or hybrids (judges with lay people). Maybe some would like to afford a jury with the services of a lawyer ex-officio to help the jury figure out the meaning of the law. In the end, however, the system remains. Post-Reading 1. Which of the following sentences best summarizes the story presented in this writer s LEAD? a. When asked about her opinion about the American jury system, a friend of mine offered harsh criticism which I was able to challenge based on inspiration from a play. b. A friend of mine expressed her disdain for the American jury system. I was forced to listen to her tirade even though I disagreed with her opinion. c. I was so appalled by my friend s beliefs about the American jury system that I had to end the conversation immediately. d. Recently, a friend of mine expressed a very popular opinion with which I agree. 2. Before analyzing the message presented in Twelve Angry Men, the writer gives the reader important context (background information) to help the reader understand the main events from the play. Put a BOX around the paragraph that does this.
3. Which of the following quotes from the essay presents Mark s thesis (argument) about the American jury system (that he argues is presented well in Twelve Angry Men)? a. These are key questions Twelve Angry Men begs us to ask. They re good questions because they force us to reevaluate our thinking before hastily reaching the conclusion that the system doesn t work or that it amounts to nothing more than a mere joke. b. Twelve Angry Men is a wonderful film that dramatizes the "imperfections" inherent in the American jury system. Simultaneously, it delivers the powerful message that because we are human beings and not machines, it is in the nature of things that justice demands such a system. Imperfect or not, it s the best we ve got. c. At the outset, eleven jurors vote in favor of convicting the accused without even discussing a single shred of the evidence presented at trial. d. It s great that the play is not overtly critical of the fact that the juror s personal baggage is not checked at the door. 4. Which of the following quotes from the essay presents a counterargument to Mark s argument? a. Still, what happens when the jury doesn t understand the legal definition of murder? b. Maybe we re supposed to walk away from Twelve Angry Men with a better understanding of how unrealistic it is to expect the human element to remain completely independent from the rule of law. c. Many critics argue that the jury system works against justice because a jury is not trained to distance itself from a case in the same way that a lawyer or judge is trained to do. d. However, the film also exposes us to those jurors in the room who openly express their thoughts, ideas, and feelings about the case. 5. What is Mark s rebuttal to this counterargument? a. However, how is it possible for human beings to check their lived experience at the door? Is it necessarily "bad" that jurors examine the evidence through the unique filters with which they view the world? After all, are they not called upon to speak on behalf of the diverse community in which we live? b. After seeing Twelve Angry Men, my view is that, although the system is imperfect, justice can still be achieved. c. In the final analysis, we all pull for that one courageous man who instigates the doubt in the room and opens the eyes of the blind to the truth. d. Thus, abandoning the system altogether is not the answer.
6. Which quotes shows a restatement of the thesis before the conclusion paragraph? a. After seeing Twelve Angry Men, my view is that, although the system is imperfect, justice can still be achieved. b. Maybe we re supposed to walk away from Twelve Angry Men with a better understanding of how unrealistic it is to expect the human element to remain completely independent from the rule of law. c. Thus, the film raises yet another thought-provoking question: Does the power of the jury to go its own way warrant abandoning the system altogether? d. In the final analysis, we all pull for that one courageous man who instigates the doubt in the room and opens the eyes of the blind to the truth. 7. If law student Mark Nunez were sitting here with us, what would he probably say is the theme of Twelve Angry Men? a. Leaving justice in the hands of twelve randomly chosen people is a recipe for unjust verdicts. b. Serving on a jury is a great responsibility that nobody should take lightly. c. The American jury system needs to be reformed immediately. d. The American jury system is a direct reflection of the nature of the American people. 8. Re-read the following quote from Mark s essay: The film also does a great job of not being overtly critical of the fact that some people merely follow their "gut" when it comes time to cast their vote. One particular juror in Twelve Angry Men votes in favor of convicting the accused. When challenged, however, he readily admits that he doesn t know why he thinks that the accused is guilty. This man s character is used as a vehicle to expose a serious flaw in the system. We see that sometimes jurors completely abandon reason. Which juror is Mark referring to in this quote? a. The 7 th Juror b. The 10 th Juror c. The 5 th Juror d. The 11 th Juror 9. Which of the following best summarizes Mark s point about jurors who follow their gut instead of focusing on the facts of the case? a. People can t help but make decisions this way. There s nothing we can do about it. b. Jurors who have personal baggage should be screened out so that they aren t allowed to serve on a jury. c. This is the natural human condition, and despite it, juries can still be effective. d. These people should learn how to leave their personal prejudices behind.
10. How would Mark most likely respond to a person who claimed that citizen juries don t work because jurors aren t experts in the law? a. Justice is just an abstract idea that juries should strive for it s not something that can actually be achieved. b. There is no possible way we can train every single citizen to be an expert at the law. c. Correct! Juries should be made up of trained law professionals who have passed the State Bar Exam. d. Diverse perspectives in a jury can ultimately help a jury deliver a just verdict. 11. Mark effectively sums up his paragraph with a several sentences that we call a Connection to Life. Which of the following best summarizes Mark s conclusion paragraph? a. Jurors should be paid, trained, and coached before they give a verdict. b. Although there are many ways to interpret Twelve Angry Men, the current justice system will remain the same until people actively work to change it. c. The ending of Twelve Angry Men is unclear (but it is meant to be that way). d. Although there are many ways to interpret Twelve Angry Men, my interpretation is the best.