ipl-logo

Prejudice In Twelve Angry Men, Written By Reginald Rose

837 Words4 Pages

Twelve Angry Men written by Reginald Rose, is like a dirty pool; nobody wants to swim in it. Twelve Angry Men represents many horrible factors that can happen in a trial; the defendant in this story is accused of murdering his father. From the beginning the defendant is judged by many jurors. The defendant does not receive a fair and free trial due to prejudice, poor economics, and a lack of responsibility. Prejudice influences the fair trial for the defendant in Twelve Angry Men, written by Reginald Rose. The jurors already assumed that the defendant was bad in the beginning when they heard the story and were ready to send him to be executed. For example, one of the jurors says he has lived among people like the defendant for his whole life …show more content…

They can’t control what they say or do. The jurors go off topic a lot and tend to talk about unnecessary things. The jurors have talked about a window being open or closed; they have talked about playing tic-tac-toe, and some have talked about their past lives and yes, it kinda relates to the trial but they should focus on their lives, they should be focused on the defendants. In the beginning of the play, they were talking about how hot it is and when they opened the window, they tend to get off topic a lot about the window and have to be reminded to get back on topic. “There are twelve of us in this room; it’s the only window, if you don’t mind!” (17) The jurors are arguing over the wrong topic and completely ignoring the fact that someone's life is at stake. In other words, in Twelve Angry Men the jurors can be seen as sarcastic and immature. They joke and play around, but they also talk about unimportant subjects. “(with sarcasm) This is a very fine boy.” (20) This juror is joking around at a time that is not very appropriate; they are not taking this case seriously enough and need to be taught how to act. The jurors in Twelve Angry Men are not responsible and should not be able to keep these very important jobs; these jurors are very unfair and have a lot of

Show More
Related
276 Words | 2 Pages

In 12 Angry Men by Reginald Ross the themes of prejudice and the truth conflict with one another. Throughout the book, Juror 10 is prejudice against kids living in the rough part of town saying things such as, “I’ve lived among ‘em all my life. You can’t believe a word they say. You know that” (Ross 16) and “Look, you know how those people lie. I don’t have to tell you.

Read More
755 Words | 4 Pages

Daja McLaurin Benton TA: Yiwen Dai Communications: 250 1 April, 2016 12 Angry Men Assessment After viewing the movie 12 Angry Men the group was able to implement the ideas of group think immediately during the start of the movie. Since the men briefly established a relationship from the time of witnessing the trial to start of deliberation n the empty room and reaching a unanimous decision, they found that all of the men initially achieved a verdict of guilty accept for juror 8. After this surprising decision the men began to show their true colors and distinguish how one may believe something and another juror may believe another. The group takes time in pleading individual opinions while deciding on the guilt or innocence of a young boy

Read More
474 Words | 2 Pages

The play Twelve Angry Men written by Reginald Rose the jury decides whether or not the boy is guilty of murder in the first degree. Juror Eight votes not guilty because, he needs more evidence. Juror Eight is compassionate, when all the other jurors voted the boy guilty. He tenderhearted proclaims that voting him guilty isn’t easy he implies, “Look this kids been kicked around his all his life.” Juror Eight doesn't want to just send the boy off to prison without further investigation.

Read More
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
731 Words | 3 Pages

His prejudice comes from the fact he used to come from the slums and considered those people trash. The third juror reveals himself to be emotional and has his opinion of the trial. Juror #3 prejudice comes from the his own experience. At age eight, his son ran away and later hit him in his face; causing him to believe all kids are rotten.

Read More
537 Words | 3 Pages

“Twelve Angry Men” is a story that tries to show how prejudice should not be used to distort the course of Justice. Juror 3, a man who owns a small business who proudly employs

Read More
536 Words | 3 Pages

Juror 3 believes that all youth are dangerous and immature, encouraging how personal prejudice obscures the truth, but later on realises he’s wrong. ‘I told him, I'll make a man out of you.’ Throughout the play juror 3 is stuck on the belief that the ids ‘ Is guilty’ this belief prevents juror 3 from believin the facts that are presented to him. Juror 3 had an argument with his son which made him flee from home. ‘Its the lids, the way they are nowas=days.

Read More
1203 Words | 5 Pages

In the movie 12 Angry Men, the jurors are set in a hot jury room and they are trying to determine the verdict of a young man who is accused of committing a murder. The jurors all explain why they think the accused is guilty or not guilty. As they are debating back and forth, the reader begins to realize that each juror brings their own judgement of the world and their own biases. The viewer can see that the jurors have their own distinguishable personalities, but all of their personalities intertwine with each other to create a perfect character balance for a great movie.

Read More
1191 Words | 5 Pages

The play 12 Angry Men is about a jury of twelve men that are given the task of deciding the fate, guilty or not guilty, of a young boy accused of murdering his father. The theme of standing up against the majority is very prevalent in this story because of the decisions some of the jurors make throughout the play. Juror 8 makes the decision to vote not guilty, he is the one and only juror in this play that decides to vote not guilty for the boy in the beginning. The other eleven jurors decide to vote guilty because of the evidence that they have been presented with. The act of Juror 8 standing against the majority of the other jurors about the case, voting not guilty, allows the jurors to thoroughly dissect the case, understanding it fully and thoughtfully before making their decision of guilty or not guilty.

Read More
803 Words | 4 Pages

In 12 Angry Men, the movie begins in a courtroom where the case is being discussed by the judge, who seems fairly uninterested. The jurors are then instructed to enter the jury room to begin their deliberations. They take a vote and all but juror 8 vote guilty. The jurors react violently to the dissenting vote but ultimately decide to go around the table in hope of convincing the 8th juror.

Read More
801 Words | 4 Pages

In "twelve angry men," we can see how prejudice has its own way with the cloak of justice. Personal prejudice is most strongly evident in the characters of Juror #3 and Juror #10. At the beginning of story, Juror #3 immediately claimed that the case was simple and the defendant’s guilt was obvious. Although he was not a new juror and ought to be experienced

Read More
591 Words | 3 Pages

The justice system that relies on twelve individuals reaching a life-or-death decision has many complications and dangers. The play Twelve Angry Men, by Reiginald Rose, illustrates the dangers of a justice system that relies on twelve people reaching a life-or-death decision because people are biased, they think of a jury system as an inconvenience, and many people aren’t as intelligent as others. The first reason why Reiginald illustrates dangers is because people can be biased or they can stereotype the defendant. The Jurors in Twelve Angry Men relate to this because a few of them were biased and several of them stereotyped the defendant for being from the slums. The defendant in this play was a 19 year old kid from the slums.

Read More
814 Words | 4 Pages

‘Twelve Angry Men’ written by Reginald Rose, is based on the story of a jury who have to come together to determine the fate of a young boy accused to have murdered his own father. Initially, eleven of the jurors vote not guilty with one of the juror being uncertain of the evidence put before them. As the men argue over the different pieces of evidence, the insanity begins to make sense and the decision becomes clearer as they vote several other times. Rose creates drama and tension in the jury room, clearly exploring through the many issues of prejudice, integrity and compassion, in gaining true justice towards the accused victim. These aspects have been revealed through three character who are Juror 10, Juror 8 and Juror 3.

Read More
915 Words | 4 Pages

People act upon what they think. Within “12 Angry Men”, all of the jurors have an opinion but some voice their more than others. One juror in particular, Juror Ten, voices his opinion about the boy in question. Repeatedly throughout the play, Juror Ten makes many thoughtless and hurtful comments about a certain kind of people. It is clear that Juror Ten’s uncompromising belief that the accused is guilty is because of his dislike for the boy’s race.

Read More
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 Twelve Angry Men, Written By Reginald Rose

Related Topics

Open Document