Twelve men must decide if a boy is guilty. Eleven say yes. One man says no — and slowly, he changes their minds.
Want more detail? Read this lesson at B2/C1 level →
These are the new words. Match each word (1–8) to its meaning (A–H). Say your answers out loud — "I think 1 is D" — then check.
1 = C (a jury) · 2 = E (guilty) · 3 = A (a witness) · 4 = G (evidence)
5 = H (doubt) · 6 = B (to vote) · 7 = F (a knife) · 8 = D (to prove)
Sidney Lumet's 12 Angry Men (1957). Read each part. Then try the questions from memory, and talk about the last one. (There are spoilers — that is fine, we want to talk about it.)
Twelve men sit in a small, hot room. It is 1957, in New York. They must decide: is an eighteen-year-old boy guilty of killing his father, or not? If they say "guilty," the boy will die. This is a big decision.
First, they vote. Eleven men say "guilty." Only one man, Juror 8, says "not guilty." He does not say the boy is innocent. He only says: "I am not sure. And if I am not sure, I cannot vote guilty."
The other men are angry. One man wants to leave quickly — he has tickets for a baseball game. Another man does not like poor people from the boy's neighbourhood, and he is sure the boy is guilty just because of that. But the leader of the group says: "OK. Let's talk about it. Each person can explain why he thinks 'guilty.'"
1. How many men vote "guilty" at first, and how many vote "not guilty"?
2. Why does Juror 8 vote "not guilty"?
1. Eleven vote guilty; one, Juror 8, votes not guilty.
2. He is not saying the boy is innocent — he says he is not sure enough to say "guilty."
Juror 8 starts to ask questions about the evidence. The police say the knife is special — there is only one knife like it in the shops near the boy's home. But Juror 8 goes out and buys the exact same knife, at a shop near the boy's home! Now they know: the knife is not special. Maybe someone else had a knife just like it.
Next, they think about an old man who lives under the boy's flat. He says he heard the boy shout "I will kill you!", heard a body fall, and then walked to his door in fifteen seconds to see the boy run down the stairs. But the old man is not fast — he had a stroke, and he walks slowly. The men time how long it really takes to walk to the door. It takes more than forty seconds!
Also, a loud train passes near his window at that exact time every night. Could he really hear the shout so clearly?
1. What does Juror 8 do to show the knife is not special?
2. What two problems do they find with the old man's story?
1. He buys the exact same knife near the boy's home, showing that more than one knife like this exists.
2. It takes much longer than fifteen seconds to walk to his door; and a loud passing train would make it hard to hear a shout clearly.
One by one, the men change their vote. One man says bad, unfair things about poor people — the other men stand up and turn their backs on him. They are ashamed of him. A woman across the street said she saw the murder through a train window at night — but she needs glasses, and she was not wearing them in court! Maybe she could not see clearly.
Only Juror 3 still says "guilty." But we learn something: Juror 3 has a son he does not talk to anymore. He is really angry about his own son — not about this boy. Finally, he looks at a photo of his son, and he cries. He changes his vote to "not guilty."
Now all twelve men agree: not guilty. Outside, on the courthouse steps, two of the men — Juror 8 and Juror 9 — say their real names to each other for the first time.
1. Why does Juror 3 finally change his vote?
2. What is surprising about the last scene, on the steps?
1. He realises his anger is really about his own son, not about the boy on trial, and he breaks down and votes not guilty.
2. The two men say their names for the first time — all through the film, we never knew any juror's real name.
This film is full of people asking questions — about the knife, the witnesses, and each other. Let's make sure you can ask a question the correct way.
Complete each question.
1. you hear the man shout that night?
2. she wear glasses in court?
3. juries usually agree quickly?
1. Did (past — did you hear)
2. Did (past — did she wear)
3. Do (present habit — do juries)
Complete each question with a question word and did.
1. the old man walk to the door? (asking about time)
2. she see the murder? (asking in what way)
3. the men change their vote? (asking for the reason)
1. How long did (time)
2. How did (way/manner)
3. Why did (reason)
Fill each gap with the correct question. Read it aloud when you finish.
" you sure?" asked Juror 9. "Yes," said Juror 3. "But you see his face clearly?" "Well…" said Juror 3. " the old man really hear the shout?" asked Juror 8.
Are (you sure) · did (you see) · Did (the old man really hear)
Use "be" (am/is/are) alone for questions with "be"; use do/does/did for other verbs.
Here is the surprising part: this story is based on something real, and a famous science experiment explains why one man could change the whole room.
In the American justice system, twelve ordinary people (a jury) decide if someone is guilty. To say "guilty," all twelve people must agree — this is called a unanimous decision. And the rule is: if there is a real, reasonable doubt, the jury must say "not guilty." Even if some jurors think the person probably did it, "probably" is not enough.
The writer of this story, Reginald Rose, was once a real juror himself, in a real trial in 1954. His own experience gave him the idea for this story.
In the 1950s — around the same years as this story — a scientist named Solomon Asch did a famous experiment. He asked people to say which of three lines was the same length as another line. It was a very easy question. But some people in the room were actors, and they all gave the same wrong answer on purpose.
About one in three people agreed with the wrong answer, just because everyone else said it! But when only one other person gave the correct answer, most people felt free to say the truth too. This is exactly what happens in the film: one man says "I don't agree," and slowly, the others feel free to think again too.
Is the ending realistic? Not really. Studies of real juries show that the first vote decides the final result about 90% of the time. One person changing everyone's mind, like in this film, is possible — but very rare in real life.
Do all three tasks out loud. Use the timer to keep talking.
Tell the story of 12 Angry Men in your own words. Use these steps to help you: the first vote, eleven guilty and one not guilty → the knife from the shop → the old man and the noisy train → the woman and her glasses → Juror 3 and his son → all twelve agree: not guilty.
Try to use some key words (jury, guilty, witness, evidence, doubt, vote, knife, prove) and ask at least one question correctly ("Did...?", "Why did...?", "How did...?").
Should one person be able to stop eleven people from deciding something, just because he is not 100% sure? Is this good, or is it a problem? What do you think?
Talk about groups and doubt.
Not sure what to say? Choose one: