Examples Of Biases In 12 Angry Men

In the novel Twelve Angry Men, Reginald Rose highlights how the American justice system can be easily corrupted by those with prejudiced views. He exemplifies the idea that the biases people have can be caused by certain experiences and their upbringing. Through Jurors 3, 4, and 10, Rose illustrates the biases against the defendant, meanwhile, he explores the biases in favour of the defendant with Juror 5. In turn, he also points out how flawed the American justice system was and still is to this day by using personal biases and prejudice from the jurors. All the personal prejudice displayed by the Jurors is an example of how easily the decision-making process can be skewed and become a matter of subjection. Firstly, Rose highlights the issues

As the text progresses, Rose indicates that Juror 3’s decision may have more to do with the fact that his own son didn’t appreciate him as a father, he talks about how they “had a fight” and his own boy ‘hit [him] in the jaw”. Juror 3 then goes on to mention how he hasn’t seen his son in “two years” and how disappointed he was with him. Later in the book, Juror 3 opens up about it more with an aggressive attitude to try and back up his guilty vote. He openly has a prejudice against the young defendant as he says, “they kill you every day”, which refers to his son meaning that he put so much effort into improving him every day, that it all felt worthless in the end. This statement is also used to show how badly Juror 3 wanted the defendant to be guilty and insinuate that he is fully capable of killing someone, even his own father. Rose uses these examples to illustrate how much of Juror 3’s personal issues can twist his mind into thinking worse of the defendant. Secondly, Rose highlights the notion that you can have different kinds of prejudice in the jury room, and this can change people’s