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

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

The protagonist “is a quiet, thoughtful, gentle man… he is a man of strength tempered with compassion.” While some jury members weren’t at all satisfied with Juror Eight having a different opinion from them and basically showing them how work is done, everyone will agree that he was one of the most civilized jurors in there, unlike Juror Three, whom has short-temper and doesn’t like anybody else’s opinions. One of the jury members specifically said that Juror Three had done nothing but be rude, while Juror Eight had been polite and showed the most he could about the