How Race And Stereotype Can Affect Justice Being Served

Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose is one of the only literary pieces that reveals the dark truth of America post-WWII. This is a play depicting a jury of twelve white men deciding if a sixteen-year old defendant is guilty of the murder of his own father. In addition, knowledge versus ignorance is the strongest theme in Twelve Angry Men. Rose uses a set of character foils with static characters, a specific time and place, and the archetype of darkness versus light to convey this idea.

This case was one of truth and justice. It becomes evident when the Juror 9 says to Juror 10. ‘Do you think you have a monopoly on truth?' [Juror 9, page 8] The fact is, nobody really knows what the truth is, and at the end of the play, still nobody does. The boy may have been guilty, but as Juror 8 pointed out, who were they to make that assumption? Most of the Jurors had taken for granted that what the prosecution had told them was the truth. Through much discussion the Jurors realised that this may

Juror 3 was basing his failed relationship with his son on the accused boy. The reason that he had such a bad relationship with his son is because when the boy was young, he ran away from a fight and Juror 3 said: “I’m going to make a man out of you or I’m going to bust you up into little pieces trying”. Later on, when his son was older, they got into a fight and Juror 3 hasn’t seen him since. This experience probably left him the impression that all kids take their loved ones for granted, and that they deserve severe punishments. Juror 3 is not the type to provide the sharpest evidence or information, but he is very determined to prove that the accused really did murder the victim. Juror 8 practically gives nothing away about his real life, probably because he did not want to add his own prejudices to the case. Juror 3 gave both his ill-mannered personality and bigotry away in the play.

Seeing his chance, he is firmly set on this boys guilt, seeing his own son's guilt in the accused. But it does not stop there.

A boy may die,” and changes his vote to “not guilty” which is another instance where the boy gets a fair trial. The 12th and 7th juror find it difficult to decide on which way to vote and therefore vote “not guilty” so that the boy is not “sent off to die.” The 12th juror’s lack of a defined and consistent point of view reflects America’s post war materialism. The 4th juror believed that the defendant was guilty for most of the play but then was the 2nd last juror to change his vote and admitted that he had a “reasonable doubt.” Although the audience never finds out whether the defendant was “guilty” or “not guilty” the jurors give the “kid from the slums” an honest trial.

Juror 8 had many chances to change his opinion about the boy’s case, and yet he never did. Throughout this whole play, Juror 8 stood his ground and was

From there the viewers see that the 12 Jurors retire to a private room where they briefly become acquainted before the deliberation begins. It is clear to the viewers that even before deliberation begins that there are clear biases among the Jurors. The Jurors number off and give their verdicts, and almost right off the bat all the Jurors, aside from one (Juror #8), vote guilty – and they also make it clear that they plan to deliver said verdict without forethought, on Henry Fonda (Juror #8) is the opposing vote of not guilty. His vote of not guilty

Throughout the text, negative racial prejudices hinder the success of justice, thus denying truth in the judicial system. Due to the defendant being hispanic, and from the slums, negative racial prejudices become prevalent in the juror’s opinions, which ultimately leads to injustice, as the truth is denied and ignored. The negative racial prejudices are depicted throughout the play multiple times, especially by Juror 10, who is revealed to be an open racist who believes that the 16 year old defendant should be sent to the electric chair due to his hispanic nationality. Within the play, Juror 10 states “They’re violent, they’re vicious, they’re ignorant, and they will cut us up. That’s their intent” when referring to the hispanic ‘race’. The direct dialogue conveyed within Juror 10’s statement allows the

In 12 Angry Men, Juror #8 tries to convince the other jurors that the defendant of the case, an 18 year old boy accused of stabbing his father to death, is not guilty based on a reasonable doubt. Throughout the film Juror #8 goes over the facts and details of the case to point out the flaws in the evidence in order to prove there is, in fact, a reasonable doubt. The film depicts the struggles of the underdog and going against the majority in order to stand up for what is right. In one scene, the piece of evidence being put into question is a testimony from an elderly man who lived below the boy and his father and claimed he heard the murder happen and saw the boy leave the apartment after it happened. It is being put into question whether the elderly man who walked with a limp could make it to his doorway in order to witness the boy running away from the crime in fifteen seconds.

In today’s society, discrimination continues to affect millions of minorities from inappropriate name calling to being shot by a law enforcement officer because you were perceived to be dangerous. The underlying effects of racial discrimination are seen in all aspects of our society, especially in our social institutions. These social institutions range from the educational system to our government, yet racial discrimination is more evident in the criminal justice system. When analyzing how the criminal justice system discriminates against minorities we are able to do so through the visible disparities within the system. Unfortunately, these disparities display African Americans having the highest population rates in the criminal justice system, therefore, we can immediately conclude this disparity in population is due to the injustices conducted by the system. Thus, there is a need for urgent change not just within the criminal justice system but within all social institutions beginning with our government. This change should create greater opportunities for minorities to enter the political field in our government as well as promoting higher participating in voting. Yet, the criminal justice system within all its aspects practices discrimination due to its deeply interwoven prejudice, institutional racism, and socioeconomic status.

Policing and punishment in America is hardly colorblind. It is not a coincidence that minorities serve longer sentences, have higher arrest and conviction rates, face higher bail amounts, and are more often the victims of police use of deadly force than white citizens. When it comes to criminals, many people have a preconception of what a criminal is. Usually when people think of a criminal they picture a Black or Latino face. The thought of an Asian criminal is often related to Asian gangs. Interestingly enough, White people as a group are rarely associated with the thought of crime, even though they account for 70% of arrests and 40% of the prison population each year (Russel xiv). This seems to be

Juror No. 8 wasn’t trying to defend the boy he was just doing his job, because of that he slowly became a hero without knowing it. Juror No. 8 could of went and decide to choose guilty but he didn’t because he knows it wouldn’t be right not even sharing a thought about it. He continued to convince all eleven jurors that their was reasonable doubt and that the boy was

The play showed the theme of “Stereotyping in the World” through the characters’ proper reasoning, communicating, and believing in good faith. Twelve Angry Men allowed the views of many different men to see past the outside of a person and look at who they actually are. The play will put the test of each of the jurors’ character and show that the clear theme in the play is “Stereotyping in the World.” The boy has been out in a life where he has no other way out of the setting and must live in. Even though he lives in the area does not mean that he is that category and so does the

This plays show just showed the value of African American in a society that oppresses them. By providing detail about the mishaps that occurred on this day shows how the American way exploited African Americans, while laughing at white people because they could not survive without African

The story begins at the end of a murder trail, that takes place in a New York City courthouse. A 18-year-old hispanic boy from the slums is on trial for allegedly having stabed his father to death. It is up to the jury consisting of twelve men, to decide whether the boy is guilty or not. The evidence against him rest on a denouncing mix of circumstantial evidence and eyewitness testimony. The facts seem clear to the jury members, all except for one juror, who believes that there's a reasonable doubt. He cannot explain why he thinks so, but sticks to his beliefs and encourage the rest of the jury to properly discuss the case. As the men engage in a debate, the pressure and heat in the room intensifyes resulting in various facets of their each mens character to emerge and hidden prejudices start to show