12 Angry Men Court System Analysis

The purpose of Reginal Rose’s in the play 12 Angry Men is to give the reader the idea of how different the court system was different from then to now. This also emphasizes the essence of bias between these twelve individuals, therefore this caused conflict between one another. This play was between the (1920’s-2002’s) but more towards the 1950’s. During this period the court system was very complex in terms of the judicial system helping the prosecutor’s rights. The Jury at instances came to a decision that would benefit them and not the prosecutor, since they had the final word on a case. For example if the jurors wanted for a case to be closed fast so that they could return back to their regular schedules they could simply say “guilty” without having to verify evidence clearly and come up with the most reasonable explanation which would be accurate for the prosecutor and the victim. As one can compare the courts system to now from back then one can come to conclusions that the courts system to now is much better. This is because now there is laws in which the prosecutor is protected and jurors have to examine the case clearly and have reasonable evidence to back up there decision. As mentioned in the play the jurors wanted to go back to their regular schedule and simply just vote guilty, although the jurors though that they had all come to a final answer, two of the jurors (Juror 8 and

Throughout the play there is a great plenty of suspense between the jurors since they could not come up with one unanimous decision on whether to pronounce the prosecutor of guilty or not. As mentioned in the play by the foreman there was a lot of arguing between the jurors, “All right, let’s stop all this arguing. We’re wasting time here,” (Rose 18) this line is a clear example that emphasizes that there was a lot of biases which lead to