ipl-logo

12 Angry Men By Reginald Rose

647 Words3 Pages

12 Angry Men
“It’s easy to stand in a crowd but it takes courage to stand alone” - Indian lawyer, non-violent, protest activist, and leader Mahatma Gandhi. This suggests that it's easy to follow a crowd and share their same opinion but it takes courage to have your own opinion.
This idea fits in the play “12 Angry Men” by Reginald Rose, In this play there are 12 men chosen for jury duty to decide the fate of an 18 year old boy from a poor part of town who allegedly stabbed and killed his father. There were two witnesses that said he did it. One is an old man living on the floor below the boy. The other was a woman that said she saw the boy through the el train, stabbing his father. At first, all the jurors chose guilty without giving it a second thought and looking at the evidence. They thought he was guilty because they either didn't want to be there and wanted to be done with the trial or had their own opinions on his …show more content…

In doing so, he displays the courage to stand alone. The reason behind his vote was that “There were eleven votes for guilty - it's not easy for me to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first.”(Act 1 page 15). Juror 8 reenacted how the old man that lived in the apartment under the boy and his father said he heard the boy scream and run down the stairs, he said that when he heard the scream he ran to his door and the old man said it took him 15 seconds to go to the door and open it and saw the boy run down the stairs. But when Juror 8 walked the same layout as the old man's apartment it took him 41 seconds. This proves that the old man isn't reliable. “And you’re trying to tell us he lied about the whole thing? ( said juror 12). No, he wouldn’t really lie. But perhaps he’d make himself believe that heard those words and recognized the boy’s face.” Said juror 9 (Act 2, p34). This means that there is reasonable

Show More
Related
568 Words | 3 Pages

Therefore, Juror Nine was able to conclude that “‘that no one can prove he wasn’t. He might have been at the movies and forgotten what he saw. It’s possible. If it’s perfectly normal for this gentleman to forget a few details, then it’s also perfectly normal for the boy. Being accused of murder isn’t necessarily supposed to give him an infallible memory.’”

Read More
726 Words | 3 Pages

When asked why he voted not guilty, juror eight stated “Look, this boy has been kicked around all his life. You know---living in a slum, his mother dead since he was nine. He spent a year in and a half in an orphanage while his father served a jail term for forgery. That’s not a very good head start. He’s had a pretty terrible sixteen years.

Read More
997 Words | 4 Pages

He then decides to recreate what the old man said he did on the night on the murder. Juror #2 seems really interested in this argument and even volunteers to help with the time. In the beginning of Act 2, the jury decides to vote once more. At the time, Juror #2’s vote was “not

Read More
502 Words | 3 Pages

In the play 12 Angry Men, a murder case is being reviewed by a jury. This jury must decide if a kid who killed his father is guilty or not. Two jurors that were on opposing sides for most of the play was Juror Eight and Juror Three. The reason they were on opposing sides was because Juror Three believed the kid was guilty, while Juror Eight believed there was not enough evidence to convict him. Most of the jurors wanted to settle on having reasonable doubt, so another jury could be called in.

Read More
519 Words | 3 Pages

Ultimately, this leads to Juror 4 and Juror 8 to use their wits and reasoning to persuade the other jurors to choose between “guilty,” or “not guilty.” In the drama Twelve Angry Men, Rose indirectly characterizes Juror #4 as reasonable, in order

Read More
747 Words | 3 Pages

People tend to base characteristics of people pretty quickly; likewise, their personalities. Most people base their opinions on stereotypes. Reginald Rose and his play “12 Angry Men” demonstrate how people are quick to judge other people based on looks. In the movie all twelve jurors must decide if a young boy is guilty or innocent. At the beginning of the movie/play-write, only one juror, juror eight, decides the boy is innocent.

Read More
651 Words | 3 Pages

Ian Marthaler Mrs. Coplin Composition 13 March 2023 Reasonable Doubt in The Justice System In the play Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose, twelve jury members must decide whether the son is guilty of murdering his father. They must unanimously agree on whether the son is guilty or not guilty based on the facts.

Read More
777 Words | 4 Pages

They think this is going to be a slam dunk of a case and that this child is guilty plain and simple. That is all except for Juror number eight. He's the only supporting in favor of the young man that is on trial. After the second vote do we then see that Juror number nine follows the not guilty vote. He along with Juror number eight are convinced that something does not add up and that this young

Read More
509 Words | 3 Pages

Goliah Sanchez Ms. Hopper E10, 5 10 October, 2016 The Mockingbirds of Maycomb To Kill a Mockingbird is an book about two kids who live in a racial town and how a black man is accused of rape. The book takes place in Maycomb County, a town that discriminates black people. Harper Lee is the author of the book and petitioned it to be a love story. A mockingbird is a bird that doesn’t cause mischief, but only sings peacefully.

Read More
1108 Words | 5 Pages

In a testament to both his own stubbornness and loyalty to the guilty cause, Juror #10 rebuffs every argument made by the not guilty party. Equally important, Juror #3 is willfully obtuse to the revelations made by the other jurors, marking him as the twelfth and final juror to vote not guilty. In the end, it takes the other men demanding his line of thinking for him to finally declare “not guilty” (Rose 115). Juror #3, being the main antagonist, is stuck in his pessimistic mindset and refuses to change his decision regarding the defendant’s fate. At times, it’s clear he is blowing off rationale for the sake of maintaining his guilty verdict.

Read More
549 Words | 3 Pages

This man may be a bit timid in part due to his old age, but his quiet nature also makes him insightful, noticing very specific details about witnesses that many others on the jury missed. He seems to come off as the most respectable and well mannered man out of the twelve. He 's the first to change his vote to not guilty, mostly to give Juror 8 a chance to make his case and out of respect for his motives in gambling for support. In talking about the older man that gave testimony it 's almost as though he 's talking about himself, revealing that he wants to be useful and to do something valuable, even if it 's just this once as a juror. As you may have noticed out of all the twelve men in the movie, each and everyone of them has unique personalities, that all at one point throughout the trial, played a very effective role in deciding this boy 's fate.

Read More
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
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
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
858 Words | 4 Pages

The boy should deserve a careful discussion from jurors before face the result of the trial and he emphases that there were only two people who saw the whole process of the murder stabbing the boy’s dad Juror 8 questioned the weapon which claim to kill father, which is a normal switchblade that even juror 8 owns one himself Juror 8 told other jurors to revote, and if this time 11 jurors still think that the boy is guilty, then he will go with them and say that the boy is guilty too One person voted “Not Guilty” at the second

Read More

More about 12 Angry Men By Reginald Rose

Related Topics

Open Document