EK RUKA HUA FAISLA Submitted by : arnold dheeraj ankit santosh nitish
FACTS PRESENTED IN COURT The knife; the tool used to murder the old man Eye witness 1 – an old man who lived just beneath the house of the victim Eye witness 2 – a lady who lived right across the street just opposite to the victim’s house 4
THE VERDICT*At the start of discussion all agreed that the boy wasguilty except for one i.e. juror 8*Everyone tried to convince him that he was wrong, but hestood his ground and never change his opinion.*After listening to his thought, juror 9 an old mansupported his opinion.*Juror 8 was very creative and came up with great factsabout the case which showed that the boy wasn’t guilty.*With his persuasive power and after learning all thosefacts, the remaining jurors subsequently started to changetheir minds.*Juror 3 however was aggressive and had a sense of selfimportant, did try to prove that the boy was guilty butfinally gave up.
Juror 8 proved that it was impossible for the old man to heard the noise and to walk down the hall and reaching the front door in 15 sec He lied to the court as he wasn’t known to anybody so he tried seeking attention from the media and the mass people They also proved that the woman lied. Finally decided that the boy was innocent
Social Cognitive Theory :-*Jurors learned and made the final decisions or changed their behavior through social environment and personal factor.*E.g. – juror no. 9 decided to support juror 8’s decision that the boy was innocent where everybody else were against it. Experiential learning :-*All the jurors were learning through direct experience*They were working as a team to come to a final decision in that situation of making verdict. Cognitive theory :-*Based on the facts and finding about the case, they agreed on the final outcome i.e. the boy was innocent
Working as a team:-* Had a common goal to give a verdict and they were interdependent to each other Social loafing :-* Some jurors were less responsible and contributing less in the discussion. Free-rider effect, as some were not giving enough participation under the assumption that others will cover it. Group cohesiveness :-* From the beginning, there were disagreement among some jurors and some were not in the favor that the boy was innocent* Nevertheless, the group stick together and finally made the decision that the boy was innocent, and every jurors respected the decision.* Group dynamics :-* They interacted and some jurors were able to influenced attitudes and behaviors of others.
o Juror 8 leadership could be classified as a democratic leadership. He involves other members actively and asks them their point of view to discuss.o Juror 8 leadership could be classified as a supportive leadership. He provided a great deal of direction and leads with his ideas.o Juror 8 leadership could be described as Transformational Leadership. He had inspired the other jury members to transcend their own self- interest in order to have a meaningful and healthy analysis of the case.
* Stereotyping :* The last person who changed his opinion that the accused was not guilty i.e. juror 3 was actually stereotyping. In the past, his son, a teenager once had fight with him & because of this incident he made a general perception that all teenagers are irresponsible & could indulge in crime very easily.* One of the jurors had a very selective perception he just accepted the evidence that the boy was guilty on its face value & made up his mind which was easier for him to believe without proper thought.* Projection:* According to one of the juror 10, the accused came from slum & poor background. The boy also had a history of small crime. He projected that the boy is guilty, as most of the criminals come from poor & slum background.
COMPARISON BETWEEN THREE JURORSLead roles :Juror 8 :- Played byK.K. RainaJuror 9 :- Played byAnnu KapoorJuror 3 :- Played byPankaj Kapur
J8 :• His perception was very positive.• Initially he was having doubt about the case, butas discussion goes on he was convinced the accusedwasn’t guilty. J9 :• Good perception• Wanted to discuss and listen more about the case J3 :• Bad perception• Always wanted other jurors to be on his side• Forced others to made the decision what hewanted them to make
J8 : Openness to experience :-*Degree of intellectual curiosity, creativity and a preference for novelty and variety. Emotional stability :-*Calm, self confidence and cool.*High Self efficacy Proactive personality :-*Identifying opportunities, showing initiatives and act on them till the desired result comes.* Active constructive :-*Actively participated in the discussion. Took initiatives and ideas were logical and reliable.
J9 : Agreeableness :-*Compassionate, cooperative, warm and agreeable Good listener :-*Was listening to every juror whether positive or negative opinion until he came with valid point. Patience :-*Showed patient when other jurors made inappropriate behaviors with him, Patiently observed everyone’s point of view very closely. J3 : Neuroticism :-*experiencing unpleasant emotions easily such as anger, anxiety, aggression, depression, or vulnerability Narcissism :-*Arrogant, sense of self importance & self admiration, or extreme selfishness.* Active destructive
J8 : Intrinsic motivation :-*Doing his job and trying to achieve the best from the case to get his own satisfaction and fulfillment. Need for achievement (McClelland’s need) :-*He was seeking for excellence, competition, challenging and difficult goals Progression satisfaction :-*He remained at a particular need level until that need was satisfied.
J9 :* He was very supportive and a motivating factor for J8 .* He motivated him to come up with valid points.* When everybody were against J8’s opinion, he stood up in his side J3 : Need for power (McClelland’s theory):-* He wanted to direct, control and influence the jurors’ opinion.
J8 : Persuasive :-*By providing new info, he convinced others to change their minds.*Great communicator*Positive attitude and leadership skills J9 :*Good attitude*Opportunity grabber, he made some relevant points which was the turning point of the case. J3 :*Loud mouthed, Bad attitude*Selfish*Stubborn, Didnt respect others opinion.