ipl-logo

12 Angry Men Prejudice Essay

731 Words3 Pages

Miah Archambault
12 lessons

Prejudice gets in the way of the truth affecting the amount of time the jury spent to vote. Many of the jurors do not bother listening to the truth or facts of the case, as they’re entitled to their opinion. This is evident in the way jurors #3 and #10 come to their decision the defendant is guilty. Juror #10 brings the most prejudice into the room, as his decision was established the moment he saw the young boy from the slum. Once juror #10 laid eyes on the boy, he sees no reason to waste time on debating the defendant's fate. 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.
The theme of prejudice greatly depicts society today, as we stereotype races. In the world today, we as a society cannot get past our judgemental opinions, as the truth is left hanging. Prejudice has led fear, and hate. As a nation we have applied this theme to after 9/11 to people of the Middle East. In this case, the …show more content…

The play revolves around time and effort to analyze the issue. Juror #8 applies this theme in the jury room, depicting the facts and the truth. It is evident juror #8 endeavors his goal of having the verdict be not guilty. Juror #8 was the only juror, to fully understand the case; as the other jurors focused on only one aspect. Though, his effort is shown, as he points out his arguments to the members of the jury one by one, able to show reasonable doubt. Along with his determination to rise above with the truth, when jurors argue their thoughts. The effort of juror #8 impacts every person in the room; as the issue takes lots of time to

Show More
Related

  • Dramatic Human Experiences In Reginald Rose's 12 Angry Men

    749 Words  | 3 Pages

    This technique dehumanises them so the only way to characterise them is by their personalities and reactions to the evidence of the murder case. Only after the first vote for guilty or not guilty with a tally of 11 for guilty and 1 for not guilty is the personalities of the jurors shown. The only person to vote not guilty is the 8th juror. He is immediately criticised by his fellow jurors, but he holds his ground as he thought there were too many holes in the evidence. "

    Read More

  • Juror # 3 In The Play '12 Angry Men' By Reginald Rose

    766 Words  | 4 Pages

    Which shows that he isn’t one of the Jurors that likes different ideas that go against his own. Towards the start of the play, he is the main reason almost all the jurors decided to vote ‘guilty’ as he gives convincing points to why he believes that the boy killed his father. After every single vote, one person moves to the ‘not guilty’ side and this annoyed him the most as a few people started questioning

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men Being Alone Essay

    843 Words  | 4 Pages

    Over the course of the book, we see how the jurors get agitated, specifically towards juror eight, who believes that the boy is not guilty, going against the views of the rest of the juror. Many of the jurors are extremely biased and are true to their views. He realizes how precarious his position is but he still decides to continue fighting. Juror eight is

    Read More

  • Juror's Guilt In 12 Angry Men

    560 Words  | 3 Pages

    Juror number 3 is a very angry man who wants for the boy in question to be guilty. He wants nothing more than for him to go to jail. Juror number 3 doesn't stick to the facts he made the case more personal then it should have been. He stuck to one piece of evidence and then went on that piece until everyone agreed with him. He brought up a few times how his childhood was bad and brought a picture to show everyone and guilt trip them.

    Read More

  • Conformity In 12 Angry Men

    1371 Words  | 6 Pages

    The film 12 Angry Men opens in a courthouse where closing arguments have just concluded in the first-degree murder trial of an 18-year old boy accused of stabbing his father to death. The judge gives the jury instructions regarding their duties as jurors. The judge stresses the seriousness of the crime, what is at stake, and if they have a reasonable doubt regarding the accused’s guilt, they must bring him a verdict of not guilty. If, conversely, they have no reasonable doubt, then they must find the accused guilty. No matter what they ultimately decide, their decision must be unanimous.

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men Justice Analysis

    633 Words  | 3 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.

    Read More

  • Father Son Relationship In Twelve Angry Men

    842 Words  | 4 Pages

    Throughout the film Twelve Angry Men, we see a situation where this connection is used by two jurors to help them understand the accused and decide this boy's fate. Juror #8 brought up multiple points about the accused

    Read More

  • Prejudice In The 10th Juror

    97 Words  | 1 Pages

    1. The character that best exemplifies the theme of ‘prejudice’ without a doubt would have to be the 10th Juror. He bases his initial verdict on the suspect, upon the fact that he was already given a fair trial and considering that the vote was 11 to 1 in favor of guilty initially, there was no point in discussing the boy’s guiltlessness and ‘wasting his time’. Not only that, but the 10th Juror also bases his opinion on the fact that he apparently “lived among ‘em all my life” with ‘em’ referring to those types of kids.

    Read More

  • Fallacies In 12 Angry Men

    1404 Words  | 6 Pages

    The script introduces the viewers to the typical behavior and the state of mind of these jurors, who surprisingly turn out to be the last to change their opinions from “guilty” to “not guilty”. Juror#3 the frustrated father whose personal conflicts and experiences influence his view of the accused’s crime is very desperate to make it clear that his mind is already made up before the deliberations even start. Similar

    Read More

  • Juror's Paragraph In 12 Angry Men

    648 Words  | 3 Pages

    You know that " (19).From that statement alone it shows us that he is indeed a racist and should not being sitting on a jury, in a case where a man’s life is in the hands of these 12 men, and if he is going to judge based off of race makes it impossible to have a fair trial. Finally, as the play goes on more and more jurors are changing to a not guilty vote because of the facts being provided and realizing this boy could very much be innocent but juror number 10 stands where he has been the whole play claiming the boy is guilty. He is one of the last men to change his vote. In act three he makes a very long speech which doesn’t make a majority of the jurors very happy. Juror 10 says “don’t understand you people.

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men Rhetorical Analysis

    1186 Words  | 5 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men is in many ways a love letter to the American legal justice system. We find here eleven men, swayed to conclusions by prejudices, past experience, and short-sightedness, challenged by one man who holds himself and his peers to a higher standard of justice, demanding that this marginalized member of society be given his due process. We see the jurors struggle between the two, seemingly conflicting, purposes of a jury, to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent. It proves, however, that the logic of the American trial-by-jury system does work.

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men Analysis

    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

  • Stigma In 12 Angry Men

    750 Words  | 3 Pages

    The play clearly shows a great representation of the problems in the modern day court system. These complications include biased jurors, ignorant and careless jurors, and lazy court-appointed lawyers. A major problem in the court system is, biased and close minded jurors can often slip through the interview process before the court case. In Twelve Angry Men, Juror Four makes a point that offends Juror Five and shows how judgmentally he thinks; “The children who come out of slum backgrounds are potential menaces to society” (Rose 318).

    Read More

  • Decision Making In Twelve Angry Men

    347 Words  | 2 Pages

    The book “twelve angry men” is an interesting play as the dozen men try to reach a unanimous decision while sequestered in a room, trying to figure out whether the boy is guilty or innocent. The twelve jurors have their own unique characteristic as the play indicates them by their decision, their changes of decision, and mostly by their attitudes towards the case. The juror 5 is a juror who grew up in a disreputable and lousy slum and who doesn’t hold back against the jurors and the defendant that he comes from a slum, also, do not believe and agree with people who think every children who come out of slum backgrounds are potential menaces to society. “I’ve lived in a slum all my life - I used to play in a backyard that was filled with garbage.

    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

More about 12 Angry Men Prejudice Essay

Open Document