Team Leader No. 1: He was an assistant coach of a football team outside the judging room, his job was to keep everyone focused on the task at hand. At the beginning of the film he insists on voting guilty, but at the end he changes his vote to not guilty after hearing all the evidence. Juror no. 2: This man didn't talk much, he was very shy and got a little in the discussion of this conflict. After the evidence is presented, he thinks about it and then changes his verdict to not guilty. Points 7 and 10 are trying to get him to change his vote back to guilty and at one point in the film he feels like he's had enough of point 10's changes to not guilty at the end. Juror no. 3: This juror is a friend, he is a small business owner, he strongly states that he started his business from scratch and is very happy with himself, it seems to me, and now he has thirty-four employees working in his business. In the early stages of this film we learn that he doesn't have a good relationship with his son and they don't speak to each other anymore, he's a stubborn old man and I had the feeling that he was bringing his experiences into play and leading one to believe that the boy really stabbed his father and is the last to be persuaded to vote not guilty. Juror no. 4: This man is a stockbroker and he is trying to look at this case as logically as possible and he is trying to take all the information and put it to good use. But he is quite arrogant and thinks he is a criminal just because he grew up in the slums. This is where the arrogance comes in, he talks a lot about assets being money and juror #1. 10 tells him to shut his dirty mouth voted not gui...... in the middle of the paper ...... and says the women had the same deep mark on the side of their nose caused by the glasses. Juror no. 10: Born in a slum and does not agree with the gentleman. Changing your mind to defend yourself. Declaring to switch sides, exchanged and stating that the knife was only used covertly and has always been like this he got angry with what the n. said. 10 and was voted not guilty in the end. Juror no. 11: He thinks the knife is very important to the case. He begins to change his mind, he wants to dig deeper into the case, in the end he changed his vote and doesn't think the boy is capable of killing his father. Juror no. 12: He doesn't find it important that he was distracted, he wants to get this case closed. He wants to be funny but he's not, he's left with 3 1 in his theory that the boy always has murder on his mind. He starts thinking and changes his vote to not guilty, then guilty, then not guilty.