ipl-logo

Prejudice In 12 Angry Men

752 Words4 Pages

Maria Thennis
We believe what we want to believe

12 Angry Men, a story written by Reginald Rose, shows us the many prejudices that people hold. Race, culture, age and a person’s past all influence how they are seen by others, right, wrong or indifferent. This movie explores the strong views held by 12 men on a jury who asked to determine the guilt of a poor Puerto Rican boy with a criminal past who is convicted of killing his father.

In 12 Angry Men, 10th juror demonstrates how racism affects one's own beliefs and judgments. In the movie, 10th juror says “You’re not going to tell us we’re supposed to believe him, knowing what he is. I’ve lived among ‘em all my life. You can’t believe a word they say. You know that.” 10th juror believes …show more content…

4th juror has the strong opinion that where a person comes from is directly correlated to their character. He states, “This boy-let’s say he’s a product of a filthy neighborhood and a broken home. We can’t help that. We’re not here to go into reasons why slums are breeding grounds for criminals” Juror 4 believes because the defendant grew up in the slums, he is guilty of the crimes in which he is charged. Just like in our society today, many like Juror 4, believe that people who live in the inner cities are automatically gang members who commit crimes. We see that same judgement in the west of Native Americans that live on reservations. People, like Juror 4, believe that those who grow up in poverty are automatic criminals. They believe that poverty will push them to do anything they can to get what they want and need. In addition, the 8th juror states, “Look, this kid’s been kicked around all his life. You know, born in a slum. Mother dead since he was nine. He lived for a year and a half in an orphanage. That is not a very happy beginning.” This strengthens the jurors’ case that they boy is guilty because of where he grew up.

In 12 Angry Men, jurors believe that a person is incapable of ever doing right after he has done wrong. The 7th juror states, “Look at the kid’s record. He stole a car. He’s been arrested for mugging...He was picked up for knife fighting.” He believes that because of

Show More
Related

Block 4 Prejudice Is A Big Problem In Today's Juries

466 Words | 2 Pages

Block 4 Prejudice is a big problem in today’s juries, as it can put an innocent person in jail, or worse. Twelve angry men by Reginald Rose is a great example of what can happen if jurors' minds are poisoned by prejudice and bias. The book is centered around Juror 8 who has the big job of showing a prejudiced jury that a kid who was alleged to have committed premeditated homicide was innocent. Reginald Rose uses the 3rd juror to develop the ideas of prejudice on juries by showing how personal experience can help feed into prejudice heavily, and how.

Read More

Biases In Juror 3

439 Words | 2 Pages

Juror 10 categorizes those who live in the slum with statements such as “ They don’t need any real big reason to kill someone, either. You know, they get drunk, and bang, someone’s lying in the gutter…most of them, it’s like they have no feelings”. He makes strong generalized statements classifying all kids who are born in an environment where there is violence and poverty as criminals, although they may hold no criminal record. It is this bias that leads him to believe that this kid has definitely murdered his

Read More

Prejudice In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men

825 Words | 4 Pages

A kid kills his father” (Rose). The two jurors that stand out as the father figures of the play are juror number eight and juror number three, though both in very different ways. Juror number three from the beginning looks over the boy, being the first to vote not guilty. There were eleven votes for guilty. It’s not so easy for me to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first” (Rose).

Read More

Stereotypes In Twelve Angry Men

537 Words | 3 Pages

One reason our justice system is dangerous is due to stereotypical jurors. Stereotypical jurors can have an impact on the verdict. In the play, Twelve Angry Men, the majority of the jurors are stereotypical. Their opinions aren’t based off of the facts, only by their belief of how they see certain people are. Juror four stereotypes the boy on jury because he grew up in the slums.

Read More

Examples Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men

915 Words | 4 Pages

His prejudice is clear when he says that “I’ve lived among ‘em all my life. You can’t believe a word they say” when speaking about the boy (16). Juror Ten’s prejudice causes him to disregard all of the facts that are presented to him by Juror Eight that can prove that the accused is not guilty. Juror 10 allows his prejudice to blind him of the truth. That is until he is called out by his fellow jurors.

Read More

Examples Of Biases In 12 Angry Men

916 Words | 4 Pages

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.

Read More

Prejudice In The Way Of Truth In Twelve Angry Men By Reginald Rose

569 Words | 3 Pages

In the play Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose, we can see that prejudice gets in the way of truth. Many of the jurors that participated have let prejudice get in their way to see the truth and look at the real situation and facts, for example, Juror Three, who “is a very strong, very forceful, extremely opinionated man within whom can be detected a streak of sadism… is intolerant of opinions other than his own, and accustomed to forcing his wishes upon others.” He has a son that he identifies as a “tough guy”, which is one of the descriptions of the 19-year-old accused, Juror Three let the image of his own son be reflected on the boy and made him think unfairly. Getting to the bottom of a complex issue takes time and effort. At the beginning of the play, most jury members wanted to get over the case and go home as early as they could, but one of the jury members, Juror Eight, who was sure the boy was not guilty, took many hours to question the evidence and the case and murder itself, but he was not the only one as other jury members also spoke about what they thought in the past options, fairly quick, it was almost six in the evening and Juror Six wanted to leave to go to his family, it may have been more of an excuse to leave, but the jurors did not let him leave because they had gone far enough to decide where the trial was going

Read More

12 Angry Men Biases

1212 Words | 5 Pages

His thought is that he can get back at his son by sending this boy off to his death. He sticks to his vote of guilty throughout the play and tries to get others on his side, even when it is clear there is reasonable doubt. Towards the end of the play the jurors realize the women that testified must wears glasses, and could not have seen the boy murder his father, which is one of the key testimonies Juror 3 is making his claim out of. After recognising his vote of guilty is wrong, Juror 3 defends himself by saying, “How do you know what she saw?”(lll,62) The rest of the jurors decide there is reasonable doubt, but still Juror 3 blurts out, “I think he is guilty!”

Read More

Examples Of Social Injustice In 12 Angry Men

803 Words | 4 Pages

This process continues throughout the course of the movie, and each juror’s biases is slowly revealed. Earlier through the movie, it is already justifiable to label juror 10 as a bigoted racist as he reveals strong racist tendencies against the defendant, stating his only reason for voting guilty is the boy’s ethnicity and background. . Another interesting aspect of this 1957 film is the “reverse prejudice” portrayed by juror

Read More

Personal Insight In 12 Angry Men

228 Words | 1 Pages

Throughout the play 12 Angry Men, jurors use reasonable doubt; previous knowledge or opinion of a topic, to influence the opinions of other jurors. Personal insight used by Juror eight, juror 9, Juror 5, Juror 8, and Juror 2 influence other jurors by changing their opinions and their reasoning behind that vote. For Instance, Juror eight exhibits how the old man 's testimony is not valid. He demonstrates the old man walking from his bedroom, down the hall, and down the steps, just in time to witness the boy stab his father.

Read More

12 Angry Men Internal Conflict Essay

583 Words | 3 Pages

When juror three says “he hit me”,this is important because it shows juror thinks that kids who don’t listen to their parents are either from a slum neighborhood or are slum kids. He also compares his son to the boy without realizing it and judges the boy without even knowing him formally. This shows his internal conflict of anger with his son. Juror 5 also has past experiences that affect his decision making. “I used to play in a backyard filled with garbage.

Read More

Theme Of Emotion In 12 Angry Men

873 Words | 4 Pages

The juror’s emotions affected their belief by putting the boy onto the chair. Juror number 3 was convinced that the teenage boy was guilty. This was due to his past experiences within his family; the rage that he had towards his past created a very one-sided belief. Therefore, juror number 3 let his emotions choose the side he would be on. His emotions gathered up anger, frustration and family rage leading him to ignore the rest of the information provided.

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

12 Angry Men Essay

1174 Words | 5 Pages

In what seemed like solid, compelling evidence at first, turned out to be faulty after deep analysis and logical thought. By exposing the audience to the logical discoveries made by the jury, 12 Angry Men truly displayed a sense of realism throughout the film. Perhaps the most realistic aspect of the film is best described by critic Mark Nunez, where: Many critics advance the rational argument that the power of a juror to decide one way or another for no apparent reason cannot possibly work to achieve justice. However, the film also exposes us to those jurors in the room who openly express their thoughts, ideas, and feelings about the case. This juxtaposition of characters in the jury room is ultimately consistent with the fact that the room should reflect the diverse community in which we live.

Read More

Social Psychology In The Movie Twelve Angry Men

721 Words | 3 Pages

The movie “Twelve Angry Men” illustrates lots of social psychology theories. This stretched and attractive film, characterize a group of jurors who have to decide the innocence or guiltiness of an accused murder. They are simply deliberating the destiny of a Puerto Rican teenaged boy accused of murdering his father. Initially, as the film begins, except the juror Davis (Henry Fonda), all other jurors vote guilty. Progressively, the jurors begin trying to compromise on a point that everybody agree because the decision of the jury has to be unanimous.

Read More

More about Prejudice In 12 Angry Men

Related Topics

Open Document