ipl-logo

Juror Three In Twelve Angry Men

186 Words1 Page

I believe people do have a tendency to allow their prejudices to direct their decisions. People have their prejudices, feel they are right and go along with that feeling. A great example of this is Juror Three in Twelve Angry Men. He believed the boy murdered his father because he felt he did it. As the play went on, Juror Eight started proving how the boy was innocent. In the end Juror Eight changed all the other juror’s minds, except for Juror Three’s. Juror Three ended up changing his vote, not because they changed his mind but because he gave into peer pressure. He still had his prejudice influenced decision, he only gave in because he didn't want it to be a hung jury. Another example, from the same play, is Juror Eight. He also had a feeling,

Show More
Related

  • 12 Angry Men Assessment: 12 Angry Men

    755 Words  | 4 Pages

    Though juror 3 has been adamant on the guilt of the young boy it is safe to say that this case meant more to him because the relationship with his son is similar to the relationship between the boy and the father. Since his personal vendetta causes him to forcefully accuse the boy of murder it leaves the jury 11-1 in favor of not guilty. Since carefully reviewing the movie it becomes very prevalent that there has not been enough substantial evidence to convict the boy of murder. Furthermore, with the usage of group think all of the men, accept juror 3 are able to put their pride aside and vote what they truly believe the verdict should be, which is not guilty. Though, one of the more pragmatic points in the film happens after juror 3 becomes infuriated after realizing that all of the men are voting not guilty.

    Read More

  • Juror's Duty In 12 Angry Men

    432 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the court system, jurors are tasked with the duty to conduct a fair verdict based on the testimony given and additional evidence shown. Some may forget this responsibility and use their prejudices that affect the juror's decision on the defendant's future. As a result, the accused may be falsely convicted and lose the majority of their life. The play 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose shows three perfect examples of prejudices during jury duty such as colorism, classism, and ageism.

    Read More

  • Justice In 12 Angry Men

    729 Words  | 3 Pages

    “The children who come out of slum backgrounds are potential menaces to society” (Rose 318). Juror 3 was being biased in the play because his son hit or abused him like how the boy is being tried for stabbing or abusing his father. “When he was fifteen he hit me in the face” (Rose 317). Other times in real life that people could be biased is they have

    Read More

  • Character Differences In 12 Angry Men

    1133 Words  | 5 Pages

    Although 3 does change his mind in the end, he is the last to change so he is the leader for the guilty side. In the end, the reader can look at figure 1. and take away the fact that juror 8 is the main character, and that jurors 3 and 8 causes the main conflict in the

    Read More

  • Peer Pressure In Reginald Rose's 12 Angry Men

    1247 Words  | 5 Pages

    While all of the other men have changed their vote to a not guilty verdict, the third jurors remains with his original belief. Even in the very end of the play, he acts hostile against the others trying to change his mind, in saying “Do you think I’m an idiot or something?” (Rose 72). One juror that seems almost impervious to argumentative fallacies and peer pressure is Juror 8. Juror almost displays the ideal juror, and the rest tend to mimic the flaws of the system.

    Read More

  • Examples Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men

    915 Words  | 4 Pages

    Throughout the whole play, Juror Ten remains stubborn in his decision that the defendant is guilty. Yet, at the end the finally sees that there is reasonable doubt (62). Interestingly enough, on the previous page Juror Ten is called out by Juror Four (60). The foreman also has some prejudice at the beginning of the case. He brings up another case that is similar to the one they are doing.

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men, By Reginald Rose

    466 Words  | 2 Pages

    Throughout the play, the jurors are faced with the temptation to conform to the opinions of others, particularly the dominant figure of Juror 8. However, Juror 8's determination to consider all the evidence before

    Read More

  • Prejudice In C. P. Ellis And Veiled Intentions

    481 Words  | 2 Pages

    Humanity prejudges others for many various reasons whether it is based on race, gender, culture, sexuality, etc. We sometimes forejudge others without even knowing it just because we grew up thinking that its’ “okay” or “normal”. It’s not okay but society has that impact on us all and we feel as though we can do it without facing consequences. Based on what I’ve read in "C.P. Ellis" by Studs Terkel and "Veiled Intentions" by Maysan Haydar, both authors believe that prejudice is something a person is taught, but they both experienced prejudice differently;

    Read More

  • Jury Duty In 12 Angry Men

    1207 Words  | 5 Pages

    Imagine getting that one dreaded letter in the mail, calling you to do the one thing you didn’t plan the week before your wedding, JURY DUTY. Reginald Rose wrote the play Twelve Angry Men for a television drama after he sat on a jury. The characters in this play are identified not by names but by numbers. Twelve men are confined to a deliberation room after the trial of a 19-year-old boy accused of stabbing and killing his father. Twelve Angry Men illustrates the many dangers of the jury system like, a biased jury, being left with questions, and feeling inconvenienced by jury duty.

    Read More

  • Standing Up To The Majority In 12 Angry Men

    1191 Words  | 5 Pages

    The play 12 Angry Men is about a jury of twelve men that are given the task of deciding the fate, guilty or not guilty, of a young boy accused of murdering his father. The theme of standing up against the majority is very prevalent in this story because of the decisions some of the jurors make throughout the play. Juror 8 makes the decision to vote not guilty, he is the one and only juror in this play that decides to vote not guilty for the boy in the beginning. The other eleven jurors decide to vote guilty because of the evidence that they have been presented with. The act of Juror 8 standing against the majority of the other jurors about the case, voting not guilty, allows the jurors to thoroughly dissect the case, understanding it fully and thoughtfully before making their decision of guilty or not guilty.

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men Analysis

    814 Words  | 4 Pages

    Juror Ten announces his intentions very early in the play. He speaks loudly and forcefully from the beginning, clearly showing his racism and prejudice towards the boy. Juror 10 quickly votes guilty and asserts that the defendant cannot be believed because “they’re born liars”. Additionally, he claims that the “kids who crawl outa those places are real trash.”

    Read More

  • Juror 8 Character Analysis

    1254 Words  | 6 Pages

    A group of juror comprising of 12 men from diverse backgrounds began their early deliberations with 11 of ‘guilty’ and 1 of ‘not guilty’ verdicts. Juror 8 portrayed himself as a charismatic and high self-confident architect. Initially, Juror 1 who played the foreman positioned himself as self-appointed leader of the team in which has led his authority to be challenged as his leadership style lacked in drive and weak. In the contrary, Juror 8 is seen as the emergent leader considering his openness to probing conversations while remaining calm. Implying this openness to the present, it has become crucial that a good decision relies on knowledge, experience, thorough analysis and most importantly critical thinking.

    Read More

  • Discrimination In 12 Angry Men

    1346 Words  | 6 Pages

    Juror 3 has his heart set that the boy is guilty, only because his own son left him years ago. In the movie he explains, I 've got a kid. When he was eight years old, he ran away from a fight. I saw him. I was so ashamed, I told him right out, ‘I 'm gonna make a man out of you or I 'm gonna bust you up into little pieces trying.’

    Read More

  • Examples Of Social Injustice In 12 Angry Men

    803 Words  | 4 Pages

    In these two critically-acclaimed movies, government ignorance is explored in distinct ways. In 12 Angry Men, a jury of 12 men is sent to determine the fate of an 18-year-old slum-raised Latino boy accused of stabbing his father to death. A guilty verdict means an automatic death sentence. In Beasts of the Southern Wild we are taken on an adventure alongside Hushpuppy, an African-American six-year old, who lives on a poverty-stricken island called the Bathtub and whose father’s tough love prepares her for a harsh world. As completely opposite as these two perspectives seem, each represents opposing sides of social injustice and ultimately deliver similar messages.

    Read More

  • Reflection On Martin Luther King Critical Thinking

    972 Words  | 4 Pages

    In my experience, what Martin Luther King Jr. calls “thinking intensively and critically” is very different from what my high school teachers called “critical thinking”, most especially by the way Dr. King links intelligence and learning to the development of character, that is, growth as a person. Too often in my past, teachers mentioned critical thinking only as a mental activity of seeing through stereotypes, evaluating both sides of issues and understanding and accepting differences. As worthwhile as these are, I have found that high level thinking without having a more enlightened character is simply inadequate. That was a recent, very positive experience with two very nice people of different faiths. As much as we had been taught in class about prejudice, the recent terrorists attacks across the world bred a good deal of ill-will in

    Read More

More about Juror Three In Twelve Angry Men

Open Document