Wow, I haven’t watched 12 Angry Men since high school.

A lot of insights to take away...the biggest to me is how easy it is for people to take everything at face value when there are a lot of questions that were left unanswered. I was pretty troubled by how poor the defendant’s representation was where they had to put some of that stuff together in the Juror Room...good thing they had Fonda’s leadership to get them to a fair verdict.

Fonda’s character was the most interesting to watch and was very admirable. This is someone who operates by what is fact and what is not. I don’t think I remember him saying that the boy was innocent (maybe I’m wrong) but he did not have enough facts to prove he was guilty. He never reacted emotionally and responded to people based on what he had heard, what was known, and what was sensible.

The scene at the end where he waited for last juror displayed immense compassion and proof that he doesn’t function or make decision emotionally.

Thanks,

Jake