Juror Ten's Role In Twelve Angry Men

Juror Ten’s role in Twelve Angry Men

In Reginald Rose’s play Twelve Angry Men, Juror Ten’s derogatory views on people living in slums, represents how one’s prejudice can have a negative effect on the civil discourse of a jury. Throughout the play, Juror Ten displays biases against people from slums when he states that he’s “lived among ‘em all my life” and claims that one “cannot believe a word they say”(Rose 16). Juror Ten’s prejudiced claim creates a negative environment as the jurors start to argue with each other in an uncivil manner. Reginald Rose uses this interaction to convey the idea that one’s toxicity can have a negative effect on an entire group of people. The disruption of civil discourse can be seen in today’s society as there are many situations where people discriminate against

In addition, Juror Ten shows prejudice when he claims that all people from slum backgrounds “get drunk” to the point where they don’t care if there is “someone lyin in the gutter”(59). While Juror Ten is ranting about people from slum backgrounds, the rest of the jury leaves the table as they cannot handle the discriminatory behavior anymore. This further disrupts the discourse of the jury as all of the jurors become angry due to the fact that prejudiced ideas are being brought up. People becoming livid due to one’s discriminatory behavior can occur in today’s society, as there are many events such as bullying or racial profiling that occur often. Furthermore, Juror Ten’s previous interactions with people from slums create his bigoted idea that no matter what new evidence is shown “you know what you're dealing with”(12). Juror Ten votes guilty because of the boy’s background instead of the evidence that is shown. Even when the evidence is shown to be flawed, Juror Ten still believes that the boy is guilty