"Twelve Angry Men", by Reginald Rose.

Essay by snookers_girlHigh School, 12th gradeA+, May 2003

download word file, 4 pages 4.8

Downloaded 123 times

This semester I read the play "Twelve Angry Men", by Reginald Rose. It is about a jury trying to come up with a verdict for a teenage boy who is being accused of killing his father. In the play there are 2 very important characters. These characters are Juror Number Three and Juror Number Eight. Number Three is very against talking about anything. He is convinced that the boy is guilty and doesn't care to listen to any other opinions. Juror Eight is very opposite of number three. Number Eight will always listen to all opinions and wants to look everything over. He does not know yet if the boy is guilty or innocent. In this play a very important point is made. This point is: justice isn't justice if it is biased. Many times in this play people added their own personal lives into what they felt happened on the night of the murder.

They often looked at the boys background, and decided who he was by their experiences and personal feelings. People have a natural instinct to favor one side of a case or another. Usually these feelings come from a personal experience or situations. Often times these feelings were challenged.

One incident that a personal situation is effecting the case is done so by Juror Number Ten. He is not ashamed of being biased. He tells the other jurors, "I've lived among'em all my life. You cant believe a word they say." The part of this sentence that makes it so biased is when he uses the words "I" "among'em" , and "they" . These words show that he is putting personal situations into his statement , also they characterized the boy into a certain group from his background. Though the man knows...