Twelve Angry Men Essay

720 Words3 Pages
WHY WAS IT SO DIFFICLUT FOR THE JURORS IN TWELVE ANGRY MEN TO MAKE A FINAL VERDICT Reginald Rose’s play Twelve Angry Men portrays the fallibilities of the social justice system. The 8th juror was the main character that allowed the defendant to get a fair trial, however he also made it harder to decide the final verdict. Other jurors, like jurors 9 and 5, who had reasonable doubt, helped the architect reach his “not guilty” verdict, by clarifying some of the testimonies and evidences that were given to them, which had an impact on the final decision. While other jurors such as 10 and 3, only served to make the conclusion to the jury more mystifying, by standing in the way of other’s arguments, using aggression, prejudice and forceful tactics. Therefore, the dangers of specific qualities in people are displayed to the readers, using the jurors as microcosms for the different groups of society. Juror 8’s compassionate character allowed the verdict to take place. From the beginning the play writer allowed there audience to realise that this architect has many important qualities as he is willing to question the ‘facts’ with which he has been presented. Juror 8’s ability to question the innocence or guilt of the defendant rather than assuming his conviction- “do you think he lied” – allows the audience to examine the validity of the adversary system as a “elven to one” vote is made. Indeed, the only Juror “to stand against ridicule of others” the morally sympathetic architect wont send the defendant to death without “at least talking about it” Consequently, the jury room becomes tense and agitated with arguments as the jurors become twelve angry men who argue and struggle for hours to make a decision of the verdict Furthermore, throughout the whole play the 8th and 3rd Juror had been rattling back and fourth. The 3rd Juror had been attacking the

More about Twelve Angry Men Essay

Open Document