12 Angry Men Justice Analysis

633 Words3 Pages

Jurors for Justice? What if the justice system wasn’t as unbiased as you thought? Within the play Twelve Angry Men the justice system supposedly chose 12 men to give a fair verdict for a boy that supposedly murdered his own father but, instead some jurors have other plans, bias backgrounds, or predetermined decisions. One way Twelve Angry Men shows an unfair trial is the backgrounds of the jurors. An example of this is when Jurors Four and Ten talk about how kids from bad neighborhoods are very likely to become criminals (Rose 318). This is not always the case, however, and is just judgemental on the jurors’ parts. A second part of the play that shows this is when Juror Eleven talks about his former country and how he moved to America, and was happy to serve jury duty. Juror Eleven seemed like he was happy to be at jury duty so this could have influenced his decision. A third piece of the play that shows this would be when Juror Five took offense to what Jurors Ten and Four said because he grew up in a bad neighborhood (Rose 318). This particular example affected his decision by making him …show more content…

This is shown in the play when Juror Seven says he has tickets to The Seven Year Itch and wants to rush the trial (Rose 314). A way this shows he doesn’t want to be here is because he wants to get out of there so he does not miss his show. Juror Three is also another person that would like to get out of jury duty. This example is proven when Juror Seven wants to vote and he responds with “Let’s vote now.” (Rose 314). A third juror to show he may have wanted to rush the trial is Juror Ten. This could be thought because right when the jury almost reached a verdict for guilty, this juror was asking questions making it seem like he was guilty (Rose 320). These three jurors prove the point that some jurors rush the trial while serving jury

Open Document