ipl-logo

Signposts In Twelve Angry Men, By Reginald Rose

899 Words4 Pages

When reading the Twelve Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, the signposts help the reader understand the story more deeply and connect with the author's empathy and emotion. Three examples of signposts being mentioned are, tough questions, words of the wiser, and aha moments. In this play the defendant was known as guilty before trial or reasonable evidence was given. The jurors based their “evidence” solely on prejudice and bias throughout the story. With the jury of eleven biased men and one man willing to give some thought into the trial, how do you think the defendant felt through the trial? How do you think that he felt being accused of something he didn’t do? This is one of the big questions in Twelve Angry Men. Tough questions are seen …show more content…

Juror number three states “what’s the matter with you guys? You all know he’s guilty! He’s got to burn! You’re letting him slip through your fingers!(Rose 1957). This shows the reader that the bias of the jurors was solely based on the racist thoughts they had pretrial. An interesting part to think about from this play is the fact that by the end of the story, all twelve men had agreed, not guilty for the defendants trial. The question is why would eleven men with the determined thought that the defendant was guilty, change their mind within a few hours and pieces of justified evidence? The final decision stated that the defendant was…“Not guilty, not guilty, not guilty, not guilty, not guilty, not guilty, not guilty, not guilty, not guilty, not guilty, not guilty, not guilty.”(Rose 1957) This quote summarizes the biggest question as to why eleven biased men would change their minds in such a short period …show more content…

When juror number three finally speaks, “not guilty!”(Rose 1957) After realizing his prejudice, all along, it brings attention to the reader, turning their heads, and feeling relief as though the defendant is not guilty. Since juror number ten and juror number three were the most headstrong and argumentative, the moments of their final realization were very important. When the murder weapon is brought into the room, journal number eight contradicts the court's evidence and pulls out a replica of the knife. The evidence is automatically unreasonable. The knife is no longer true evidence of the crime, and they must turn to different evidence. This creates an a-ha moment because throughout the trial, number eight continues to beat the evidence and speak on behalf of the defendant stating as not guilty. And lastly, when all of the evidence leading up to the woman's witnessing comes to a conclusion, it’s proven that the woman could not see without her glasses. Therefore, the defendant was found not guilty as that was their last piece of reasonable evidence to prove the case guilty. The author creates an effective argument and then boom! The reader is taken back after all of the evidence is laid before

Show More
Related

  • 12 Angry Men Rhetorical Analysis

    681 Words  | 3 Pages

    The jurors continually exhibit the opposite of the aforementioned emotions and beliefs. After the protest by the 8th Juror about the oddly quick guilty verdict voted on by the jurors, the 7th Juror dismissed him continually, “It’s just that we’re talking about somebody’s life here. I mean, we can’t decide in five minutes. Suppose we’re wrong? 7TH

    Read More

  • Jury Opinion Shift In Twelve Angry Men

    1440 Words  | 6 Pages

    When discussing whether the crippled old man could walk from the house to the door in 15 seconds, Juror 3 initially insisted that the old man's testimony must be accurate, but then said in the heat of the moment that the old man's words were not necessarily accurate. At this point, everyone realized that there were doubts about the crippled old man's words, as well as the inconsistencies in the views expressed by Juror 3, who was a bit too radical. After Juror 8 demonstrated the scene of the limping old man walking from the bedroom to the front door, he had a confrontation with Juror 3. Juror 3's impulsive "I'm going to kill you" statement, which had been their evidence of the defendant's guilt, was again overturned when the other jurors fell silent and looked at Juror 3. It was also here that the jurors began to suggest that people should not bring personal feelings to bear on the guilt or innocence of the

    Read More

  • Examples Of Innocence In To Kill A Mockingbird

    493 Words  | 2 Pages

    “Guilty… guilty… guilty… guilty…” I peeked at Jem: his hands were white from gripping the balcony rail, and his shoulders jerked as if each “guilty” was a separate stab between them” (Lee 215).With Jem’s unbiased eyes, the evidence in court had proved Tom’s innocence without doubt.

    Read More

  • What Is 12 Angry Men Jury Duty

    1108 Words  | 5 Pages

    Juror #3 and Juror #10 are prime examples of this. During the story’s second act, the jury votes once again, resulting in a six to six split. Juror #10 is irate over that, exclaiming that, “I’m sick and tired of facts” (Rose 76). Juror #10 was so blinded by his prejudice and self-imposed obligation to vote guilty that he is, to his own admission, actively ignoring the facts of the case. By this point in the story, there has been more than enough reasonable doubt fostered that at least five jurors have changed their minds.

    Read More

  • Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men

    1172 Words  | 5 Pages

    Juror Three is an angry, frustrated and a small minded person that wants this kid to be punished for the sole reason that 3’s own kid beat him and ran away, so three is a very hateful person to the kid on trial even though he doesn’t even know him. The vote is 11-1 in favor of not guilty, three is the only juror to vote not guilty, and he is persistent with the facts that the other jurors have proved could be false, so in a rant he yells at the jurors that they are wrong and the kid is guilty, until eight says something that makes him change in an instant. Juror Three states, “That goddamn rotten kid. I know him. What they're like.

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men Doubt Essay

    533 Words  | 3 Pages

    He portrays this by giving us a murder trial of a young boy to look at and think about. Each of the jurors doubted eachother with how they feel about this case and how they think they should proceed at the end of this case. Some might say that juror three ws being too rough to the boy but some might say that juror eight wasn’t harsh enough for the boy's consequences. Juror three was full of doubt.

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men Certainty Vs Certainty Essay

    598 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Twelve Angry Men doubt is more important than certainty in the conclusion. Doubt is more important than certainty because someone's life is on the line, and when there's a chance that the truth is invalid, it's important to talk about it. At the beginning of the play, all the jurors had to vote if they believed that the boy was guilty or not. Everybody voted guilty except for Eight. When Three was confused about why Eight voted not guilty, Eight said “There were eleven votes for guilty.

    Read More

  • Ethos Pathos In 12 Angry Men

    997 Words  | 4 Pages

    Juror #2 finds it “interesting that he’d find a knife exactly like the one the boy bought”(24). Afterwards, the 8th Juror suggests that the old man, one of the witnesses, lied because of the point Juror #3 tried to make. Juror #3 says, that the old man “[ran ] to his door and [saw ] the kid tearing down the stairs fifteen seconds after the killing”(42). Juror #8 then suggests that the old man could not have done that because of his stroke.

    Read More

  • Juror 3 In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men

    434 Words  | 2 Pages

    He realizes this when he “contorts [his face] and he begins to pound on [the] table with his fist,” and “seems [to be] about to cry” (Rose 63). This is when Juror 3 realizes that his negative experience with his son has dictated his distaste toward the boy and that he had no real reason to oppose him as much as he did. Though being the most stubborn of the jurors, being able to re-examine the beliefs and opinions he is so fixated on empowers Juror 3 to be able to demonstrate personal accountability, showing how important personal accountability is to confronting one’s past and biases. Throughout the play, because of his loud and opinionated personality, Juror 3 assumes leadership of those voting guilty. This is in stark contrast to Juror 8, a thoughtful person who is willing to give the benefit of the doubt who is the first person to vote not guilty to give the boy a chance.

    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

  • 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

  • Minority Influence In 12 Angry Men

    1458 Words  | 6 Pages

    This movie is the best example of minority influence where in the earlier stage only one juror no. 8 says defendant is not guilty but in the end of the movie we see that he is able to influence all the jurors in a very logical manner which I am going to point out later so that all the jurors lastly says the defendant is not guilty. Minority influence is more likely to occur if the point of view of the minority is consistent, flexible, and appealing to the majority. The juror no. 8 doesn’t know defendant is guilty or not guilty but he has only doubt in his mind which he trying to clear during the entire film and with which he also able to clear the views of other

    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

  • 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

  • Literary Devices Used In 12 Angry Men

    195 Words  | 1 Pages

    12 Angry Men, By Reginald Rose, Drama. Text 1 talked about Juror 10’s point of view on the defendant and Juror 10 letting his emotions overcome him with the defendant. It shows that Juror 10 is prejudiced and did not like the defendant. Text 2 is about juror 3 and his point of view on the defendant and how juror 3's personal problems were overcoming him during the case. The central idea of text 1 is to see situations clearly and not to let emotions overcome you.

    Read More

More about Signposts In Twelve Angry Men, By Reginald Rose

Open Document