>12 Angry Men
>only 11 of them are angry
12 Angry Men
The other one is obviously internally angry with the others.
2deep4me
>one is so unangry he literally conducts his own investigation which is illegal but is still the only moral man
fucking Mary Sue
the other one is a passive aggressive leftist redditor
deep
this. he didn't see the bigger picture which is that half the point of the court system is to weed out dangerous elements in the underclass. in that broader context it's petty to get hung up on whether one scumbag did one specific crime.
Who was the non-angry man?
that would make sense if the majority of violent crime was punished
> he literally conducts his own investigation which is illegal
Is this actually the case in Burger law? What do juries talk about if they can't discuss or try to convince the others?
the last angry man is the dad who got killed by his son and let him get away with his murder
Jimmy Golightly aka James Gandolfini
i think they do their best given the endless constraints said passive aggressive leftists put on them.
Disgusting bleeding heart liberal propaganda movie. Ignore all common sense, logic, history, culture in order to save one niggerspic from jail.
Maybe the 12th one didn't show up yet
In the end, they were right to ignore everything else but common logic. The spic was not guilty and they figured it with reason.
I think you should rewatch the movie. You seem to be remembering it wrong.
>You are NOT innocent until proven guilty
>The point of the court system is NOT to prove without a doubt that you did the crime you are accused of
I'm glad I don't live in Murica. And that I'm not a minority.
>people in here unironically discussing the remake instead of the original
Yeah in the magical universe of the movie he was innocent, but in reality the amount of coincidences piled on top of each other would be absurd to ignore. This is an impossible, completely unrealistic situation. Anyone with a brain would know he was guilty. The movie is propaganda to make white people betray their own sense of justice. Fuck niggers and fuck you.
your two quotes should definitely be applied to functioning members of society. that's the other half of the purpose of the court system that I alluded to. it's just not pragmatic to extend those assumptions to welfare niggers and such because those people have less to lose in the courts to begin with, so effectively you've completely hamstrung society's ability to police its underclass.
murica has a bipolar system that can't decide whether to let illegal immigrant rapists go free or to lock tyrone up for life for a joint. to the extent that the former is true, you see the exact problem i mentioned above.
>It's another slick talking jew talks condescendingly to white people about why they're all backwards hicks and that they should bend their minds to convince themselves a non-white cannot be guilty of any crime episode
>it's another backward hick has skin so thin he can't even respond to the thread he got BTFO'd in, and instead vaguely frogposts in a different thread episode
Proof in law terms
>proof
>n. confirmation of a fact by evidence. In a trial, proof is what the trier of the fact (jury or judge without a jury) needs to become satisfied that there is "a preponderance of the evidence" in civil (non-criminal) cases and the defendant is guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" in criminal prosecutions. However, each alleged fact must be proved separately
>EACH ALLEGED FACT MUST BE PROVED SEPARATELY
So it's not about collecting a bunch of mere assumptions and stringing a headcanon situation together, but literally PROVING every single point one by one on their own. If you can't do that, you have no case.
If proof was what you imply it is, then two roasties crying on twitter that somebody glanced at them wrong 12 years ago should automatically be taken as proof of rape.
Not me, but what thread are you referring to
Only jews study law. Disgusting parasite go settle some divorces.
>two roasties crying on twitter that somebody glanced at them wrong 12 years ago should automatically be taken as proof of rape.
again sharia has a solution. just take a women's testimony to be worth 1/4th that of a man's.
The remake is superior and has a god-tier cast
>Jack Lemmon
>George C. Scott
>James Gandolfini
>Courtney Vance
>Armin Mueller-Stahl
Absolute kino
The baseball guy gave 0 shits.
I would 100% hang a jury if I had nothing better to do. Except I don't want to be there. My movie would be called "One Annoying Asshole."
>What do juries talk about
The investigation conducted by the police and attorneys.
>The remake is superior
Can someone confirm this.
it's not. the original is better.
No, the original is superior, can confirm. It's fucking raw acting, like a play. When it gets ham, it's good because, that's what the fuck it is.
Are you on drugs? You do realise everything has to be convienient in a movie in order for it to be made? It's not based on a true story for fucks sake, the writer can say whatever he wants, where the hell is your common sense man? You're talking like a senile man. "magical universe of the movie" nigga what? What are writers for, if not for writing a story? Of course it had coincidences, that's what good fiction consists of you fucking retard, no one said it's supposed to be realistic. You probably shit your pants every time the villan doesn't kill the hero when he has the chance, the hero gets saved convieniently in the last second, or the biggest coincidence makes the hero win in spite of all, life is too short to care about a perfect script, have sex and enjoy the story as it's told.
what other user is saying is that you shouldn't let this movie influence your views on the justice system because it's so fantastical.
You pretend like reality and film are not married together. Disgusting philistine..
>This is what americans ACTUALLY believe
Thank god I live in a first world country