12 Angry Men Important Quotes

In Reginald Rose's classic play "12 Angry Men," Juror Number 5 stands out as a character whose journey from uncertainty to confidence reflects the play's exploration of justice and human nature. Set in a tense jury room deliberating the fate of a young man accused of murder, Juror Number 5 initially appears timid and uncertain, but as the story progresses, he finds his voice and plays a crucial role in the quest for truth and justice. At the beginning of the play, Juror Number 5 is introduced as a young man from a similar background to the defendant, giving him a unique perspective on the case. He appears hesitant and deferential, lacking confidence in his ability to contribute meaningfully to the deliberations. This uncertainty is evident

In the book The 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose, 3 quotes in the novel stood out as the most important in the book showing the development of various characters. At the beginning of the play, the quote I found from Juror Number 8 shows character development that was happening during the first vote,” It’s not easy for me to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first,” (Rose 12). This shows that he is a nice person and takes his job seriously. When voting not guilty, this caused the jurors to look back at the evidence, and without that vote, they could have convicted an innocent person without realizing it. Another quote I found was Juror 3 talking about how he would kill the kid as he has already made up his mind,

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

For example, Juror 8 had provoked Juror 3 so much to the point in which he wanted to “kill him”. (Rose #48) The idea of someone being so angry they could kill someone is extremely important as one of the pieces of evidence is just that. The old man testified that he heard the boy yell, “I’m going to kill you”, this now portrays the idea that the boy may not have meant it, just like Juror 3 did during this scene. Rose #37)His anger toward juror 8 is justified, but also proves the point of the boy not being serious about what he said.

Similarly ,In Twelve Angry Men Juror 8 is a smart and moral juror who is willing to stand against all the other jurors for what he thinks is right. He is the main protagonist who believes a boy accused with murdering his father deserves a discussion prior to a guilty verdict. Although all the other jurors initially voted guilty, juror 8 believed that the jurors should not “send a boy off to die without talking about it first”(Juror 8, 12). Throughout the play Juror 8 combats the pressure from the other Jurors to just vote guilty and manages to convince his fellow Jurors one by one that there in fact is “reasonable doubt”(Judge, 6) and convinces them to arrive at a “not guilty”(Juror 3, 72) verdict. Reginald Rose extols Juror 8’s pursuit of justice through his success. Not only did Juror 8 stand by his principles and have the courage to stand against all the other Jurors, he also had the wits to convince his fellow jurors to change their verdict. Through these actions Juror 8 brings justice to the courts of New York city saving the life of a young boy.

He demonstrates his ignorance and prejudice over juror eleven because of where he comes from and the different ways he thinks information is useless and not needed. Juror Ten has clear judgment over the boy because of where he comes from. He states, “I've lived among ‘em all my life. You can't believe the words they say. ”(Rose

These 12 men all have their own internal and personal reasons and biases that sway their perception of guilt at the trial. For example, the deliberation in Juror Seven’s eyes “better be fast, [because he has] tickets to a ball game” (Rose 9). Juror Seven would rather get the deliberation over and go to the Yankee game than sit and give the boy a fair trial. Juror Three’s bias stems from his poor relationship with his son. When the question of the boy’s motives comes up, Juror Three sums it up to “the kids, the way they are nowadays, angry!

In the play, 12 Angry Men, written by Reginald Rose, a nineteen-year old boy is accused of the murder of his father. Throughout the play, the jurors argue the boy’s innocence and guilt. Juror Four argues that, “[...] slums are breeding grounds for criminals [...]. The children that come out of slum backgrounds are potential menaces to society”(Rose I. 21). Juror Four, as well as ten other jurors, all agree that because the boy came from a bad background, he is destined to be a criminal and should be executed for the murder. This

Reginald Rose’s ’12 Angry Men’ brings 12 jurors together in a room to decide whether a young foreign boy is guilty of killing his father. The play is interwoven with dynamic characterisation, striking symbolism and intense moments of drama. Although Rose positions Juror 8 as the hero, the strongest character is in fact Juror 4, who is an independent thinker, rational and calm even as tension begins to build. Although Juror 4 initially votes guilty, he is able to admit his fault and change his vote.

Eight is represented as the hero because he stood up for the defendant (The kid). Also, Eight didn’t wasn’t judging the kid based on what he has done in the past and where he lived. He just went by the rule “innocent until proven guilty. (Page 18)” The Foreman said “Eleven to one.

At the outset, the jurors are tasked with delivering a unanimous verdict, and most of them are eager to vote "guilty" on a young man (18) without much evidence or thought. Through its powerful storytelling, compelling characters, and intense deliberations, the film challenges viewers to reflect on their own beliefs and biases. Through their interactions, the film exposes the flaws and strengths of the jury system, as well as the challenges of reaching a fair and just verdict. One of the key themes explored in 12 Angry Men is the pervasiveness of prejudice and bias. Through the jurors' discussions and debates, the film portrays the complexities of the legal system and the difficulty of discerning truth from falsehood.

In Twelve Angry Men a boy is being charged with premeditated homicide for supposedly stabbing his father. In the begging all the jurors except one vote guilty and all think he’s guilty. They all think he’s guilty because of what the witnesses say they heard and saw alone with the boy’s background of crime and where he has lived. “Look, you know how these people lie! It's born in them!

Group dynamics are the various behaviours and psychological processes that occur in a group or between groups. It deals with the formation, functioning of groups as well as the roles each individual plays in a group. Group dynamics can be studied and understood from the movie ‘ 12 Angry Men ’. Different concepts regarding group dynamics like influence processes, influence techniques, group development and stages, effect of the environment, backgrounds of the individuals etc. were well portrayed in the film.

Juror#8 made efforts to make personal links with other jurors and tried to make everyone feel comfortable. He tried to sort out the disputes rapidly when they occur. For instance, he stops the old men when he is yelling after the extremist. Henry Fonda (juror #8) was a kind of person who owes different types of leadership traits like he was self-controlled because he listened to the points of each and every person even though, he was not agreeing with them (Basilicata, 2013). He was determined person

An individual's past experiences can have an incredible impact on the way they think and behave for years to come. So, the past have a significant impact on an individual. In my own life, I have had past experiences that have affected me to be the person I am today. One example is, whenever I walked through the downtown part of Edmonton and I noticed a lot of homeless people lying around on the streets. I felt so bad for those poor people that didn’t have a place to live. They appreciate anything and everything they get. This really effects me and teaches me to be more grateful in life. And appreciate everything I have. In the play the 12 Angry Men, jurors 3, 5, and 11 prove that their experiences has affected who they are. I believe that juror 3’s family issues such as his problems with his son has affected him to become an aggressive man. Additionally, juror 5 has had a background of living in a slum all his life. Therefore, he tries to prove that not all people living in slums are criminals. Lastly, juror 11 struggles with others judging him because he is a European Refugee. This affected him by making him feel unconfident about himself and feels that the others jurors don't take his opinion too seriously.