12 Angry Men (2/10) Movie CLIP - It's the Same Knife! (1957) HD

Movieclips

23 Apr 201502:32

Summary

TLDRThe script revolves around a heated discussion about a murder case where a boy is accused of stabbing his father. The key argument is whether the knife found at the crime scene, identical to one the boy owned, was used by him or someone else. One juror introduces reasonable doubt by presenting a similar knife bought nearby, raising questions about the coincidence. Despite skepticism from others, this moment highlights the possibility of an alternate scenario, sparking tension and debate within the jury over the boy’s guilt.

Takeaways

🔪 The boy stayed home, had a fight with his father, stabbed him to death, and left the house 10 minutes after 12.
🧽 He remembered to wipe the knife clean of fingerprints before leaving.
🤔 One character questions the possibility that the knife fell out of the boy's pocket, and someone else used it to stab his father.
🗡️ The knife is described as very unusual, and even the storekeeper who sold it to the boy had never seen one like it.
🎲 The argument revolves around whether it's a coincidence that a similar knife could have been used by someone else.
🚶 Another character reveals that he found a knife exactly like the boy's at a pawn shop near the boy's neighborhood.
💰 The pawn shop knife cost $6, and the character admits to breaking the law by buying the knife.
🧐 The discovery of another identical knife challenges the idea that only the boy could have used it.
🤷 There's a debate over whether the existence of another knife makes it more plausible that someone else could have committed the murder.
🗣️ Despite the discovery, 11 members of the jury still believe the boy is guilty, with one character expressing doubt that anyone's mind will be changed.

Q & A

What does the boy in the script allegedly do?
-The boy allegedly stayed home, had a fight with his father, stabbed him to death, and left the house at 12:10 AM.
Why is the knife significant in this case?
-The knife is significant because it is the murder weapon, and it is described as very unusual. The storekeeper who sold it to the boy had never seen one like it before.
What argument is made about the knife and the murder?
-The argument is made that it's possible someone else used a similar knife to stab the boy's father. The possibility of a coincidence, however unlikely, is raised.
How does one of the characters challenge the uniqueness of the knife?
-One of the characters went to the boy's neighborhood and bought a nearly identical knife from a pawn shop, suggesting that the knife may not be as unique as previously thought.
Why is it significant that the character bought a similar knife?
-It challenges the idea that only the boy could have used such a knife, opening the possibility that someone else could have committed the murder with a similar weapon.
What is the reaction of the other jurors to the revelation of the second knife?
-The other jurors express skepticism and frustration, with one suggesting that even if there are 10 knives like it, it doesn’t change much about the likelihood of the boy’s guilt.
What legal issue is raised when the second knife is revealed?
-It is mentioned that it is illegal to buy or sell switchblade knives, which the character admits to having broken by purchasing the second knife.
What is the main point of contention between the jurors in this scene?
-The main point of contention is whether it is plausible that someone else, not the boy, could have committed the murder with a similar knife, and whether the case is built on solid evidence or circumstantial coincidence.
What does one juror suggest will happen if the jury cannot reach a verdict?
-One juror suggests that if the jury cannot reach a verdict, the boy will be tried again and likely found guilty in a retrial.
How does the juror who doubts the boy's guilt defend his position?
-The juror defending the possibility of the boy's innocence argues that while the odds are low, a coincidence involving the knife is still possible, and the discovery of a second knife raises reasonable doubt.

Outlines

00:00

🔪 Confrontation and Murder Confession

The paragraph opens with a description of a boy who stayed home, had an argument with his father, and fatally stabbed him. The boy left the house shortly after midnight, even remembering to wipe the knife clean of fingerprints. This leads to a question of whether the knife truly fell through a hole in the boy's pocket and was picked up by someone else, who then used it to kill his father. While one person argues it's possible, another believes it's highly improbable.

🗡️ Unusual Knife Discovery

A significant focus of this section is the uniqueness of the knife. The knife used in the murder was described as rare, and even the storekeeper who sold it to the boy had never seen one like it before. This raises skepticism, with one person suggesting it would be an incredible coincidence for someone else to have a similar knife and commit the murder.

🚶 Knife Purchase and Legal Violation

This paragraph reveals a surprising twist where someone in the group purchased an identical knife from a pawn shop near the boy’s house, only two blocks away. They admit to breaking the law by buying a switchblade knife, but they argue this demonstrates that the murder weapon isn't as unique as originally thought, casting doubt on its connection to the boy.

🧐 Skepticism and Coincidence

Here, the conversation shifts to the significance of finding another similar knife. The speaker challenges the idea that discovering a matching knife is groundbreaking, arguing that the existence of another knife doesn’t prove much. They express doubt that this discovery should sway the jury's decision, questioning the probability that someone else used the same kind of knife in the stabbing.

🙋 Dissent Among the Jury

The final paragraph captures a moment of frustration among the jurors. One juror highlights the fact that the majority still believes the boy is guilty, and expresses skepticism that any further debate will change minds. The speaker implies that the lone dissenter could cause a hung jury, leading to a retrial where the boy would likely still be found guilty.

Mindmap

Keywords

💡Knife

The knife is central to the murder case discussed in the script. It symbolizes both the weapon used in the crime and the ambiguity surrounding the defendant's guilt. The fact that an identical knife was found near the boy's house introduces doubt about whether the boy actually committed the murder. The knife's uniqueness is questioned when another is found, which challenges the prosecution's case.

💡Coincidence

Coincidence is a key concept in this discussion, particularly in relation to the idea that the boy might not be guilty. The argument revolves around whether it is plausible that a stranger could have committed the murder with a similar knife. The protagonist suggests that such coincidences, while improbable, are possible, introducing doubt into what initially seemed like a clear case of guilt.

💡Doubt

Doubt plays a crucial role in this script, reflecting the uncertainty over the boy's guilt. The presentation of a second identical knife raises questions about the certainty of the prosecution's narrative. This doubt is what one juror is trying to introduce to the others, suggesting that their previous convictions about the boy's guilt may not be as solid as they think.

💡Guilty

The term 'guilty' is the central debate among the jurors. Most of them are convinced that the boy is guilty of murdering his father, largely based on the evidence provided, including the knife. However, the introduction of doubt challenges this assumption. The script explores the meaning of guilt and whether there is enough certainty to convict.

💡Switchblade

A switchblade is the type of knife used in the murder, which is significant because it was identified as rare and unusual. The discovery of a second switchblade, exactly like the one owned by the boy, weakens the argument that the boy's possession of the weapon automatically makes him guilty. This technical detail about the knife plays into the larger theme of doubt.

💡Stubborn

Stubbornness is depicted in the behavior of certain jurors who refuse to consider alternate possibilities about the boy’s innocence. One juror accuses another of being 'stubborn' for continuing to push the idea of doubt when the rest believe the boy is guilty. This reflects the tension between open-mindedness and inflexibility in reaching a verdict.

💡Neighborhood

The neighborhood where the boy lives plays a key role in the script. The fact that the second knife was found near the boy's home suggests the possibility that someone else from the area could have committed the crime. The setting emphasizes the socioeconomic backdrop and potential biases the jurors may have based on where the boy comes from.

💡Pawn shop

The pawn shop is where the second knife is purchased, which undermines the idea that the knife is a unique and one-of-a-kind item. The ease of purchasing the same knife at a nearby store suggests that the knife is not as rare as initially claimed, weakening the argument for the boy's guilt.

💡Law

Law is invoked in the context of the legality of purchasing switchblades. The script highlights that it is illegal to buy or sell such knives, raising questions about the morality and legality of the actions of the juror who purchased the second knife. This introduces a layer of complexity about the justice system and the lengths to which individuals might go to prove a point.

💡Coincidence vs. Probability

The argument about the 'million to one' probability highlights the tension between what is theoretically possible and what is likely. The script delves into the question of whether such a rare occurrence—a second person committing the murder with an identical knife—is something the jurors should consider as a real possibility. This debate about probability is central to the themes of justice and doubt.

Highlights

The boy stayed home and had another fight with his father, which led to him stabbing his father to death and leaving the house at 12:10.

The boy remembered to wipe the knife clean of fingerprints after the murder.

The speaker questions the possibility of the knife falling through a hole in the boy's pocket and someone else picking it up to stab the father with it.

It is suggested that it’s possible the boy lost his knife and someone else committed the murder with a similar knife.

The knife used in the murder is described as very unusual, even the storekeeper who sold it to the boy had never seen one like it before.

The speaker presents the scenario of an incredible coincidence if someone else had the exact same knife.

The speaker finds another knife exactly like the one the boy had and presents it to the jury as proof that it's not a one-of-a-kind weapon.

The second knife was bought in a pawn shop just two blocks from the boy's house, costing $6.

The speaker admits to breaking the law by purchasing a switchblade knife, which is illegal to buy or sell.

One juror sarcastically questions whether finding a similar knife proves anything, suggesting it's not the discovery of the age.

Another juror says that while it’s possible someone else could have used the same type of knife, it's highly improbable.

The jury is asked to take their seats and discuss further, as standing around won't resolve anything.

A juror finds it interesting that the speaker found a knife identical to the one the boy bought, suggesting there may be more to consider.

One juror expresses frustration, saying that 11 of them still believe the boy is guilty, questioning what the speaker thinks they will accomplish.

The frustrated juror suggests that if the speaker remains stubborn and hangs the jury, the boy will be tried again and most likely found guilty.