ipl-logo

Racism In Twelve Angry Men

665 Words3 Pages

Why should the color of someone’s skin effect a crime that was committed? In the vignette of “Twelve Angry Men” the author, Reginald Rose addresses racism. According to act three on page 27 the Jurors are coming to a vote on whether or not the boy was guilty or not. The boy claimed that he wasn’t guilty of committing a premeditated murder but Juror number ten said otherwise. The evidence that is shown to prove this point is when all the jurors are all at the table and they all go to the window and turn their backs towards juror number ten, specifically juror numbers three and four. This happened while the vote was nine to three, nine voted innocent and three voted guilty. Three and four turned their backs towards number ten because they disagreed on why they thought the boy was guilty. Juror number ten was an ill-mannered man who was very bigot. He was bitter and didn’t value any human life except his own. He thought the boy was guilty because the color of his skin. Juror number ten said “Most of them” …show more content…

The jurors took literally almost day just bickering and arguing over whether the boy was guilty or not. In act two the jurors were starting to change their mind about their vote on whether or not the boy was guilty or not. That is where they started to kind of come to an agreement. From the beginning of act one juror number eight was always on the boys side, and the other guys always questioned why he thought the boy was innocent. Juror number eight did not have a reason he said “ he’s nineteen years old”. Juror number eight believed that he is young and everyone makes mistakes. Juror number six had started to change his mind because he started to play out the whole thing, he played out everything the woman had testified. From this, it changed everything. It changed many people's opinion specifically the jurors

Show More
Related

Juror Three In Twelve Angry Men

186 Words | 1 Pages

As the play went on, Juror Eight started proving how the boy was innocent. In the end Juror Eight changed all the other juror’s minds, except for Juror Three’s. Juror Three ended up changing his vote, not because they changed his mind but because he gave into peer pressure. He still had his prejudice influenced decision, he only gave in because he didn't want it to be a hung jury. Another example, from the same play, is Juror Eight.

Read More

Ethos Pathos In 12 Angry Men

997 Words | 4 Pages

In his play Twelve Angry Men, Reginald Rose brings us back in time to 1957, to a jury room of a New York Court of Law where one man, Juror #8, confronts the rest of the jury to look at a homicide case without prejudice, and ultimately convinces Juror #2, a very soft-spoken man who at first had little say in the deliberation. Throughout the play, many of the jurors give convincing arguments that make one think about whether the boy is “guilty” or “not guilty.” Ultimately, one is convinced by ethos, logos, and pathos. We can see ethos, logos, and pathos having an effect on Juror #2 as he begins as a humble man and changes into someone brave at the end. Although all three modes play a part in convincing Juror #2, pathos was the most influential

Read More

12 Angry Juror Quotes

550 Words | 3 Pages

You can’t believe a word they say, you know that.” This is a big part of the characterization of #10 because it shows that the juror is stuck on their opinion that the boy murdered his father just because of his race. Another thing to point out is that this Juror only finds evidence against Juror #8 once in the entire show, and when the other juror proves #10 wrong, he almost starts a fight! Besides the woman who claimed she saw the murder, without glasses on because apparently she had a very strong prescription, she is also one of them, so why did he choose that evidence there?

Read More

Ethos, Pathos, Pathos And Logos In 12 Angry Men

1964 Words | 8 Pages

What is worth our attention in this movie is how in the beginning they are trying to convince each other to vote guilty. 11 juror voted guilty and only one voted not guilty. Their judgments were based upon either their past personal experience which created their thoughts and behavior or upon facts. Juror 8 represents the conscience. He stood up for his inner feelings that the accused young boy is innocent.

Read More

Analysis Of Stereotypes In 12 Angry Men

747 Words | 3 Pages

People tend to base characteristics of people pretty quickly; likewise, their personalities. Most people base their opinions on stereotypes. Reginald Rose and his play “12 Angry Men” demonstrate how people are quick to judge other people based on looks. In the movie all twelve jurors must decide if a young boy is guilty or innocent. At the beginning of the movie/play-write, only one juror, juror eight, decides the boy is innocent.

Read More

Why Is Juror 11 Important In 12 Angry Men

511 Words | 3 Pages

Juror #11 is from a foreign country and knows what it is like to have injustice he knows what the boy will feel like if he is proven guilty and can't do anything about it. Juror #11 likely came from a place that did not have the freedom that we do. Juror #11 fights for freedom for this boy he does not appreciate the way that the other jurors are handling this because he knows that the other jurors cannot fathom what it is like to have no rights and freedom.

Read More

Character Differences In 12 Angry Men

1133 Words | 5 Pages

Although 3 does change his mind in the end, he is the last to change so he is the leader for the guilty side. In the end, the reader can look at figure 1. and take away the fact that juror 8 is the main character, and that jurors 3 and 8 causes the main conflict in the

Read More

12 Angry Men Rhetorical Analysis

1186 Words | 5 Pages

8th juror appeals to their sense of pathos and pity by saying “this boy’s been kicked around all his life… He’s had a pretty terrible sixteen years. I think maybe we owe him a few words. That’s all.” While this has nothing to do with the case, he hopes to appeal to their humanity in order to get them to give him a chance in these deliberations.

Read More

Juror Three In Twelve Angry Men

892 Words | 4 Pages

Near the end of the play, he went on an angry tangent that highlighted his views even more clearly for the other jurors, turning them away from him and his beliefs. His view on the case was heavily swayed by his own opinions and bigotry. Up until the very end, he was sold on the fact that the boy was guilty with no reason to back it up other than due to his race. Overall, the jurors each had their own personalities that caused their views on the case to be distorted into something that would fit their own beliefs and caused conflict throughout the play. There were many factors that contributed to those conflicts along with the idea

Read More

Bias In 12 Angry Men

708 Words | 3 Pages

They are. I know it.” This scene depicts him having a dogmatic vice due to mentioning that he says, “I know it” demonstrating that his beliefs are always right and the others are wrong. Correspondingly, in light of the situation by holding a disclosed voting, juror number nine voted not guilty due to number eight’s motive being unassured whether the boy is guilty or not even though having to face against the ridicule of others. As a result, influencing juror number nine presenting a patient virtue to allow the conversation to continue.

Read More

Minority Influence In 12 Angry Men

1458 Words | 6 Pages

It is about whether the jury has a reasonable doubt about his guilt. When the first ballot is taken, 10 of his fellow jurors agree that defendant is guilty while there is only one Juror had different view that defendant is innocent. Juror No. 10 begins a racist rant. As he continues, one juror

Read More

The Judicial System In Reginald Rose's 12 Angry Men

515 Words | 3 Pages

All of the jurors in the book come in with these preconceived notions of what they think the defendant is like because of his ethnic identity and social class. This internal bias heavily affects the way they examine the evidence, and if it wasn't for Juror 8 they all would´ve been ready to give him death without even fully analyzing the case. Although they came to a not guilty verdict it was a very rigorous process in which they had to see past their own bigotry and look at the case from a logical

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

12 Angry Men Analysis

814 Words | 4 Pages

With selfish attitudes like this, it was unlikely that Juror 10 would be interested in the truth behind the evidence and the case itself. Hence, his racial prejudice was important in determining his vote. He believes the boy is guilty, not because the facts point to it, but because of the boy’s ethnicity. It is clear that Rose has constructed Juror 10 as a means of identifying that prejudice,

Read More

12 Angry Men Murder Scene Analysis

851 Words | 4 Pages

Juror eight held his ground and convince the men to look over all of the evidence. Juror eight brought out the files, acted out different situations and the murder scene. The men went back and forth for hours fighting about whether or not the boy was guilt of killing his father Slowly one by one the jurors changed their mind from guilty to not guilty. All but juror three changed their mind, he was the last one standing so the vote was 11-1.

Read More

More about Racism In Twelve Angry Men

Open Document