12 Angry Men is a fascinating, riveting and insightful examination of a diverse group of twelve jurors, who are uncomfortably brought together to deliberate the "facts" of a seemingly open-and-shut murder trial case. The premise is the trial of a frightened, teenaged defendant accused of stabbing and killing his father. However, there is an underlying sense that the jurors themselves and the American judicial system are on trial as well. The trial by jury system is supposed to produce a unanimous decision in an objective, fair and unbiased manner. This films glimpse behind the closed doors of a jury room shows that it's anything but that. So, what went wrong? In order to answer that question we must examine the twelve jurors and their personalities, their ability and often inability to communicate clearly, and the positive and negative aspects of their conflict management processes.
             The jurors are a group of predominately middle-aged white males. That's about where the similarities end. Their personalities, prejudices, weaknesses, socio-economic and cultural differences, priorities, ignorance and fears often cause them to avoid the true issues of the case. The foreman of the jury (Juror #1) is an assistant high school football coach but lacks any natural leadership skills. Throughout the proceedings he tries to keep the proceedings formal but is easily frustrated and sensitive when his "authority" or control is threatened. Juror #2 is a meek and mild bank teller who seems to try to avoid conflict at all costs. Juror #3 runs a messenger service and is a rude bully. He is extremely opinionated and biased, loud-mouthed, intolerant and temperamental. Although defiant to the end, it's later discovered that his own personal conflicts greatly influence his behavior. Juror #4 is a stockbroker. He's very logical, self-assured, and rational. It's apparent early in the movie that he...