What idea or claim does Juror 4 examine or advance?
Juror 4 is a rational, unflappable stockbroker. When asked by a fellow juror, he admits he never even sweats. One of the items of evidence he finds especially convincing against the accused boy is that he was not able to recall the titles of the movies he had seen when the police questioned him over his father's dead body. The boy's alibi was that he had been to the theater, and Juror 4 believes that alibi did not stand up to scrutiny. Juror 8 asks, "Do you think you would be able to remember the names of the movies you'd seen with your father lying dead in the next room?" Juror 4 replies that yes, he would be able to. Later during a lull in the discussions, Juror 8 returns to that line of examination. He drills Juror 4 about movies he had recently seen, and Juror 4 is unable to accurately name the title or actors in a film he had seen days previously. He actually begins to sweat while Juror 8 interrogates him. This seems to remove this piece of evidence as a barrier to him voting "not guilty."
Finally, the issue of the eyewitness account is addressed, and this is the piece of evidence that Juror 4 believes is incontrovertible. He suggests that they should deliberate only a short time longer and then inform the judge that they are a hung jury. While he is trying to get those words out, Juror 9 notices that Juror 4 is rubbing his nose where his eyeglasses rest. This reminds him that the woman who testified as an eyewitness also had "those marks on the side of her nose." Juror 4 realizes that a woman who wore glasses would not have been lying in bed at night with them on, so when she looked out her window, she could not have seen the murder taking place. This convinces him to vote "not guilty."