Guilty or not guilty, often an easy answer when you don't consider that a life is at stake. However, when a life is at stake, it is- i.e. if the verdict is guilty, the person is automatically sentenced to death, one would hope that a jury would ensure that a person is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, before sending them to death. While watching the movie 12 Angry Men, what seemed like an open and shut guilty verdict for the jury, instead took the viewer through many ethical dilemmas, specifically dealing with prejudice, capital punishment, integrity, anger and hostility, which resulted in reasonable sanctions. doubt.Movie previewAn 18-year-old young man is on trial for the first-degree murder of his father, who the prosecution is trying to prove stabbed his father to death. The judge advises the jury to consider all the evidence presented today and be sure beyond a reasonable doubt of this boy's guilt, because this guilty verdict means an automatic death sentence. A 12-man jury leaves the courtroom and enters into deliberations. an extremely hot room and a small space to determine the fate of the young man. The men, whose names were never given during the deliberations, are referred to only by their jury number, effectively seated around the table in the order of their number. The jurors vote immediately and eleven vote guilty, while juror 8 votes not guilty. The other jurors are upset by his actions, they do not understand how he could think that he was not guilty. Juror #8 stands by his beliefs and insists that even though the young man is probably guilty, he wants to make sure they actually look at all the evidence to make sure he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt . Juror #8, wanting to discuss the case, is similar to McLemore's "G...... middle of paper ......ul" moment in the film, similar to directive #3 of McLemore “it is a man's honor if he avoids quarrels, but fools never control themselves” (2003). Instead of the other jurors getting into an argument and telling him how ignorant he was, they made a stronger statement by turning their backs on him, thereby excluding him. Ultimately, Juror No. 10 voted not guilty. ConclusionThanks to Juror #8's systematic and patient examination of each of the prosecutor's pieces of evidence, little by little, each juror changed their vote to not guilty. Ultimately, all 12 jurors voted not guilty, due to reasonable doubt. Even though the movie never made it clear whether the accused was guilty or not, the justice system worked. The evidence was considered and deliberated, even though the jury's biases and ethical dilemmas were ultimately found to demonstrate reasonable doubt, and the defendant's rights were protected..