It seems an open and shut case. A young black boy, just 16, kills his abusive father after one too many beatings. A strong witness is positive he heard the boy say he was going to kill just before the father was fatally stabbed. Another witness saw the stabbing and then saw the boy flee. An open and shut case. So why does Juror 8 insist that the boy could be not guilty and refuse to give a verdict that would send the defendent to the electric chair? This is the premise of 12 Angry Men, a classic Henry Fonda film turned into a magnificent piece of claustrophobic, thought provoking…