header-logo header-logo

14 July 2020 / Mark Pawlowski
Issue: 7895 / Categories: Features , Criminal , Profession
printer mail-detail

Reasonable doubt & the movies

24172
Mark Pawlowski looks at the meaning of reasonable doubt against the backdrop of one of the most iconic Hollywood films depicting jury trial

In Twelve Angry Men (1957), acclaimed as one of the best films dramatising the imperfections of the jury system, the fate of a teenager accused of the murder of his father rests on the verdict of 12 jurors locked inside a steamy jury room. The evidence seems overwhelming and 11 of the jurors are ready to convict in what they see as an ‘open and shut’ case. Only one brave juror (played by Henry Fonda) refuses to vote and wants to talk about the case. What follows is an intense examination of the prejudices that each juror member brings to the jury room.

Fonda’s character is the great unifier throughout the film seeking to dispel bias and faulty reasoning by demanding that his fellow jurors scrutinise the evidence carefully and come to a reasoned verdict. Critics of the jury system say that it works against justice

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
FIFA’s 2026 Men's World Cup is already mired in controversy, with complaints over ‘excessive prices’ and opaque ticketing. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dr Ian Blackshaw of Valloni Attorneys warns that governing bodies may face scrutiny under EU competition law, with allegations of a ‘dominant—if not monopolistic—position’ in ticket sales
Ten years after Brexit, UK and EU trade mark regimes are drifting apart in practice if not principle. Writing in NLJ this week, Roger Lush and Lara Elder of Carpmaels & Ransford highlight tighter UK scrutiny after SkyKick, where overly broad filings may signal ‘bad faith’
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
back-to-top-scroll