Preview

Twelve Angry Men: Fairness And Reliability Of The Jury System

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
655 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Twelve Angry Men: Fairness And Reliability Of The Jury System
"Despite questioning the ultimate fairness and reliability of the jury system, Twelve Angry Men is, at heart, a tribute to this system. Discuss.
Throughout Reginald Rose’s ‘Twelve Angry Men’ the potential dangers of a justice system that depends upon twelve anonymous citizens determining the life of an equally anonymous accused are poignantly illustrated. While ‘Twelve Angry Men’ is in a sense, a tribute to the jury system, Rose predominantly questions the ultimate fairness and reliability of the system. The inharmoniousness of irrational prejudice is evidently placed within Roses’ play, accompanying this Rose brings to light the frailness of justice. The inharmoniousness of irrational prejudice is evidently placed within oses’ play. Rose ultimately accompanies this by bringing to light the frailness of justice and the questioning …show more content…
The idea that prejudice is evident and also plays a part in a jury system is clearly expressed by Rose through Juror 10’s xenophobia. Juror 10 is seen to be the most abhorrent member of the group, he is openly bitter and prejudiced, “the kids who crawl outa those places are real trash”. The prejudicial views of Juror 10 openly question the objectivity of the justice system by allowing his personal views to overshadow his judgement on the court matter. Rose uses Juror 10 to express his views on how the justice system is filled with flaws, as opinions are placed under facts. Juror 10’s prejudiced views on the accused, clouds his judgement on the fate of the 16 year old accused murder, “Bright? He's a common ignorant slob. He don't even speak good English… you know how these people lie! It's born in them!” The fact that Juror 10 bring his personal opinions into matters to do with justice, shows that Rose questions the fairness of the jury system, especially if prejudice views influence the final
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men- Rose Uses the Jurors to Show the Conflict Between Right and Wrong in Twelve Angry Men. Discuss Essay Example
    • 804 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men- Rose Uses the Jurors to Show the Conflict Between Right and Wrong in Twelve Angry Men. Discuss Essay Example

    In the play Twelve Angry Men, the playwright Reginald Rose demonstrates through the characters of the jury the conflict between right and wrong and what can come from that conflict. The play was set in the 1950’s, when only men were chosen to be a part of a jury. Rose intentionally creates the characters of the jury to have contradicting values to show how conflict is often necessary before justice can be served. The only way to give the accused a fair trial is if there is conflict occurring between right and wrong between jurors. Each juror has their own pre-conceived ideas about right and wrong considering it was in the 1950’s. Juror 8 believes the accused has a right to a fair trial; this creates the initial conflict. Conflict is necessary to ensure the right thing is done, which in this case is that the defendant was given a fair hearing. The judge states that “if there’s any reasonable doubt then you must bring me a verdict of not-guilty”. Juror 8 has reasonable doubt and elaborates it to the jury; however some juror’s thoughts are blinded by their prejudice and personal experiences. Reginald Rose displays the conflict that can occur when decisions are being made using the jurors in Twelve Angry Men.…

    • 804 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men - Seeing Things from a Different Perspective
    • 721 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men - Seeing Things from a Different Perspective

    Rose uses Juror 3 to show that certain jurors are wrong and that if they are not open minded and put their personal prejudices aside they are bound to behave unacceptably and be viewed negatively. Juror 3's biases and stubborrness to be able to see things from the eyes of others really restricts him from doing justice and giving the boy the trial he deserves as does every human, according to the American Constitution. He is immediately vocal about the supposed simplicity of the case and the obvious guilt of the defendant when he says 'The man's a dangerous killer. You could see it.' From the beginning it is evident that Juror 3 is narrow-minded and only sees things from one perspective; his own. As the story unravels Juror 3 is seen as violent and a bit crazy hence why Juror 5 asks 'What's the matter with you?' when he imitates the stabbing of the victim. Because of Juror 3's aggressive and stubborn nature he is unable to see that the defendant and his son are two different people and the importance of the trial and what it will mean to the 16 year old boy if found guilty. He thinks he is doing the world good by getting rid of one of 'them' therefore clouding his vision and making it impossible to do justice, which is similiar to Juror 10.…

    • 721 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men sociological analysis
    • 922 Words
    • 4 Pages

    12 Angry Men sociological analysis

    “12 Angry Men” focuses on a jury’s deliberations in a capital murder case. A 12-man jury is sent to begin deliberations in the first-degree murder trial of an 18-year-old Latino accused in the stabbing death of his father, where a guilty verdict means automatic death sentence. The case appears to be open-and-shut: The defendant has a weak alibi; a knife he claimed to have lost is found at the murder scene; and several witnesses either heard screaming, saw the killing or the boy fleeing the scene. Eleven of the jurors immediately vote guilty; only Juror No.8 (Mr. Davis) casts a not guilty vote.…

    • 922 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    twelve angry men presents the pessimistic view that all humans are flawed do you agree?
    • 559 Words
    • 3 Pages

    twelve angry men presents the pessimistic view that all humans are flawed do you agree?

    each juror has there own deficiencies or less than ideal qualities, these emerge through their interactions with eachother or their attitudes towards their trial. juror 10 is predjudice regularly using stereotypes to condemn the defendsant without actually considering if what he is saying is true. such as ‘a very big drinker’ or a born liar’ the third juror is guilty of stereotyping the defendant based on age, and he defends his opinions and stereotypes violently in the jury room, such as his near attack on 8th juror at the end of the first act. the play does not let a single character escape unflawed. even 8th juror,…

    • 559 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men
    • 328 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men

    Roses play Twelve Angry Men is about a dissenting juror in a murder trial who slowly manages to convince the other jurors that the case they are examining is not as obviously clear as it seemed in court. The defence and the prosecution have rested and the jury is filling into the jury room to decide if a young sixteen year old boy of a minority race is guilty or innocent of murdering his father. It begins as an ‘open and shut’ case of murder, but soon becomes a mini drama of each of the jurors’ prejudices and preconceptions about the trial, the accused, and each other, which every jury room tries to avoid. Prejudices’ and misconceptions are formed through personal experiences which influence human decision making, which is shown throughout the play from all jurors but is distinctively shown through Juror 3.…

    • 328 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    In Twelve Angry Men Rose Shows That Doubt Is an Easier State of Mind Than Certainty
    • 740 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In Twelve Angry Men Rose Shows That Doubt Is an Easier State of Mind Than Certainty

    At the conception of Twelve Angry Men, Rose exposes the audience to the devastating heat in the jury room which over looks the "New York sky line" on what is described as "the hottest day of the the year". At this stage it is revealed to the audience the apathetic nature of jury members, uninterested in the "grave responsibility" they have in deciding the fate of the "16 year old boys life" and more interested with the goal of escaping the plain, oven like jury room. With each juror being blinded by the thick glaze of heat In front of them a verdict of guilty becomes the instinctive state of mind and the room for reasonable doubt is eliminated from all but one. The author, Reginald Rose displays through juror 8 that to be doubtful when challenging a majority becomes a harder state of mind, "as it's not easy to stand alone against the ridicule of other" at this moment juror 8 initiates his campaign that we can never be certain about anything, we can only make assumptions based on the information provided.…

    • 740 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men
    • 974 Words
    • 4 Pages

    12 Angry Men

    Reginald Rose’s play Twelve Angry Men emphasises the importance of seeing things from more than one perspective. Set in a New York jury room in 1957, Rose highlights how important it is that the jury discuss all of the evidence from the case in detail and from multiple angles. Representative of this notion is the 8th Juror who is willing to acknowledge alternative views or interpretations. From the outset of the play he goes against the crowd voting “not guilty”. He then considers all of the details of the evidence including the old man’s testimony and the boy’s inability to remember the movie he saw. In contrast to this character, are Jurors 3 and 10 who are portrayed as the antagonists because of their narrow mindedness and arrogance. They are very rigid in the way they apply their single minded world view and they have a reluctance to recognise the existence of another truth. Rose endorses the 8th Juror’s ability to see things from many perspectives and condemns the 3rd and 10th Juror’s inability to do so. This reveals the significance of looking at the evidence from a variety of perspectives in order to create a just verdict.…

    • 974 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men - Prejudice
    • 1096 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men - Prejudice

    1950s America saw the nation fall into a period of national tension and idealogical turmoil following the McCarthy Trials and the Cold War, which produced a flourish of works such as Regnald Rose’s ‘Twelve Angry Men.’ Using a jury of twelve anonymous men, the play scrutinizes both the strengths and flaws of the American judicial system. The case of a fictional “delinquent” who faces capitol punishment under charges of patricide acts as a vehicle to examine the moral dilemma of prejudice and judgement, and its importance, underpinning American jury rooms in a time of profound social division. Through his structuring and characterizations, Rose does not merely attack the system, but contends is functionality stems from the very individuals within it, and their ability to see with objectivity and compassion.…

    • 1096 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Twelve Angry Men Fair Trial
    • 1132 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men Fair Trial

    Twelve Angry Men, a play by Reginald Rose, was written in 1955 at a time when America was involved in a cold war with communist countries. It shows the strength of a deliberative process that enables individuals, who have “nothing to gain or lose,” to reach a verdict. In the American jury system “everybody deserves a fair trial” and in Twelve Angry Men the defendant gets a very fair trial. All the jurors have their own opinions on the case but in the end a decision is made. The jury, and the audience, never discovers if in fact the defendant did murder his father. His guilt or innocence seems to be almost irrelevant. At the beginning of the play the vote was 11-1 in favour of guilty but the 8th Juror convinces the others to have another vote. As the play progresses more and more jurors being to change their vote and by the end of the play the vote was 11-1 in favour of ‘not guilty.’ The defendant does get a fair trial because throughout the play there was enough “reasonable doubt” for him to be guilty. The 10th juror had no intentions on giving the defendant a ‘fair trial’ and just wanted him to be sent to the “electric chair.” By the play’s end all twelve men had agreed to a “not guilty” vote. The 8th Juror had managed, by simply pointing out “sometimes the facts that are staring you in the face are wrong!” to convince even the strongest advocates of a “guilty” verdict that reasonable doubt exists and therefore the defendant gets a fair trial.…

    • 1132 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    How Does 12 Angry Men Show Prejudice Obscures the Truth?
    • 865 Words
    • 4 Pages

    How Does 12 Angry Men Show Prejudice Obscures the Truth?

    There are many significant views and values that Reginald Rose demonstrates in 12 Angry Men the most important one being that prejudice constantly affects the truth and peoples judgement. As the jurors argue between themselves as to whether a young boy is guilty of stabbing his father it is shown that “It’s very hard to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this.” This is most evident in the way juror #3 and juror #10 come to their decision that the young man is guilty as they bring in there prejudice against young people and people from the slums to make their judgement without considering the facts of the case. Rose uses juror #8 who can see the whole trial because he is calm, reasonable and brings no prejudice as a prime example of what a juror is supposed to be like.…

    • 865 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men Essay
    • 713 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men Essay

    Moreover, the 8th Juror has a clear understanding of the jury system and appears as a defender of the system which falters by the other jurors. The jury system is only successful when all individuals exclude their personal prejudice and bias in the deliberations. But most of jurors have coloured views of the case,…

    • 713 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    An Analysis of Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose
    • 880 Words
    • 26 Pages

    An Analysis of Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose

    Twelve Angry Men, written by Reginald Rose in 1957, portrays the intense discussion between 12 jurors in the American jury about a 16 year old boy, who is accused of killing his own father, and charged with “premeditated homicide”, the most serious charge in court. It explores the flaws of human nature, and the impacts of misinterpretations of the case can have on the defendant. However, they play also illustrates when jurors reassess the case and themselves, they will finally follow the judge’s words, which is to “separate the facts from the fancy.” Throughout the play, all jurors reconsiders about the case and themselves, nonetheless not all succeeds. The 4th Juror is the only character which successfully renewed his knowledge about the case and himself. Characters such as the 6th juror develops new understanding of the case but is still a few steps from truly knowing himself. While jurors such as the 10th juror, is forced to alter his vote despite rejecting all of other juror’s arguments.…

    • 880 Words
    • 26 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose
    • 663 Words
    • 3 Pages

    12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose

    The movie "Twelve Angry Men" by Reginald Rose is a drama that displays twelve jurors' in-depth reasoning to decide a unanimous decision on the defendant's sentence. There are many assets and liabilities of the group that play a role in their decision making. The jurors are all defined in terms of their personalities, backgrounds, prejudices and emotional tilts. This paper will argue that when pride, jealousy, frustration and prejudice all emerge we see irrational and rational decision making methods.…

    • 663 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men Suggests That Justice and Truth Are Different
    • 830 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men Suggests That Justice and Truth Are Different

    In his play Twelve Angry Men, Reginald Rose demonstrates the importance of judicial integrity in determining whether justice will be found through the truth. Separated by the breach of individual agendas, Rose perceives a contrast between individual subjectivity and the objective foundations of society. Upon pursuing their own understanding of justice, thus, Rose shows how conflict can undermine the integrity of a democracy, fulfilling ulterior truths above the judicial grounds of reason. As such, Roses jurors learn to reconcile both truth and justice through means of a ‘reasonable doubt’, empowering both the judicial process and unification of moral empathy.…

    • 830 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Conflict Between Right and Wrong in Twelve Angry Men
    • 846 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Conflict Between Right and Wrong in Twelve Angry Men

    In the historical play 'Twelve Angry Men' the author Reginald Rose, shows how the jurors in the play highlight the right and wrongs and how hard it can be to overcome them, which leads to conflict. The twelve jurors had the job of convicting a criminal on the term of 'beyond reasonable doubt' according the evidence they were given in court. Juror 8 was the only juror that took this on board and based his decision on this term which was highlighted during the initial vote.…

    • 846 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More

Related Topics