12 Angry Men |
Paul Lewis: How Mobile Phones Helped Solve Two Murders
|
Twelve Angry Men explorers the death of a man who was believed to be killed by his son. After the trial, the twelve jurors enter a room to discuss the fate of the boy. They talk about the facts of the case and all but one believed the boy to be guilty. They reviewed the facts of the case and what the witnesses said they had experienced. One woman claimed she had witnessed the murder happen, but it was later proven in the jury room that she couldn't have seen it because she didn't have her glasses on. Another witness, a man, claims he heard the boy yell "I'm gonna kill you!", the thud of the body, and even goes as far to say he ran outside and saw the son running off. All of this was later disproven. One by one, the jurors were swayed into the verdict of not guilty. The verdict was a difficult one to come to because the witness' views were skewed and the truth was shrouded in uncertainty.
Paul Lewis explores two cases where the internet helped piece together the truth about the controversial deaths of two men. One man in particular, a newspaper vender from London, was mysteriously killed. Police released that the man had died of natural causes and that when medics tried to resituate him, they were unable because protesters near him were throwing bottles. By the time the news had reached the newspapers, the bottles had somehow been changed to bricks. From citizen input on twitter, a story was released that there were no bottles or bricks and a policeman had killed the newspaper vender. This relates to the story of the woman in 12 Angry Men because it shows how stories and perspectives can be altered and how input on social media can be beneficial in a court case.
If the 12 Angry Men had had the internet, their dilemma would have been easier to solve. They could've turned to the many accounts of the public with the technology that we possess today. There are many witnesses on the internet. Anyone can use it so the likelihood of finding those who knew anything about the crime could have been easily accessible. Sifting through the many perspectives online could yield the truth based on the uncovered similarities. No one can know everything, so letting people with technology be your eyes and ears could have made the angry men's lives easier.
Paul Lewis explores two cases where the internet helped piece together the truth about the controversial deaths of two men. One man in particular, a newspaper vender from London, was mysteriously killed. Police released that the man had died of natural causes and that when medics tried to resituate him, they were unable because protesters near him were throwing bottles. By the time the news had reached the newspapers, the bottles had somehow been changed to bricks. From citizen input on twitter, a story was released that there were no bottles or bricks and a policeman had killed the newspaper vender. This relates to the story of the woman in 12 Angry Men because it shows how stories and perspectives can be altered and how input on social media can be beneficial in a court case.
If the 12 Angry Men had had the internet, their dilemma would have been easier to solve. They could've turned to the many accounts of the public with the technology that we possess today. There are many witnesses on the internet. Anyone can use it so the likelihood of finding those who knew anything about the crime could have been easily accessible. Sifting through the many perspectives online could yield the truth based on the uncovered similarities. No one can know everything, so letting people with technology be your eyes and ears could have made the angry men's lives easier.