Insisting Equality: Twelve Angry Men

1433 Words6 Pages
During the time Reginald Rose wrote the play Twelve Angry Men America was not an equal place for all people. A democracy is founded on the ideology that all Americans should be given a fair trial in court before being declared guilty. The twelve jurors in the play come from various backgrounds but initially, all but one vote in favor of the boy’s unforgivable sentence; while two other jurors lift two strong social stigmas and overcome their bias. One juror decided to stand up and take the time out for proper reasoning that resulted in teaching the others two jurors a lesson. Final verdicts should be made on justifiable grounds or the foundation of America’s society could be left at risk for collapse. Justifiable final verdicts are skewed when people follow the majority and that appeared to be a problem in the beginning of the play. The three jurors that stood out for their realism were the 7th, 8th, and 10th jurors because the 7th and 10th showed how society can be prejudice but an unbiased mediator can solve that harsh problem. In order to raise awareness, Reginald Rose presents three characters in his play Twelve Angry Men, and proposes that they are realistic jurors through their reasoning towards a unanimous verdict.

The 10th Juror was realistic because of his racism towards the young boy even though he did not know him, yet the juror eventually overcame his prejudice through reasoning. Rose showed that race had nothing to do with this case when in Act II; the 10th juror snaps but is quickly ignored by the whole group when he shouted, “Now you goddamned geniuses had better listen to me. They’re violent, they’re vicious, they’re ignorant, and they will cut us up. …I say get him before his kind gets us”. ..2nd Juror: I’ve hear...

... middle of paper ...

...xperts on Real Juries: A Delicate Balance.” William & Mary Law Review 55.3 (2014): 885-933. Academic Search Complete. Web. 23 Apr. 2014.

Riordan, Kate. “Ten Angry Men: Unanimous Jury Verdicts in Criminal Trials and Incorporation After Mcdonald.”Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 101.4 (2011): 1403-1433. Academic Search Complete. Web. 23 Apr. 2014.

Rose, Reginald. Twelve Angry Men. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.

Weddell, Hilary. “A Jury of Whose Peers?: Eliminating Racial Discrimination in Jury Selection Procedures.” Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice 33.2 (2013): 453-486. Academic Search Complete. Web. 23 Apr. 2014.

Wood, Jane L., Mark James, and Caoilte Ó. Ciardha. “‘I Know How They Must Feel': Empathy and Judging Defendants.”European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context 6.1 (2014): 37-43. Academic Search Complete. Web. 23 Apr. 2014.

More about Insisting Equality: Twelve Angry Men

Open Document