Miscarriage Of Justice InTwelve Angry Men And Montana 1948

Inside a room where life or death decisions are made, twelve men sit with wandering thoughts. The made up minds of some jurors are to send a boy to his death without a second thought, but one other juror may change that. Inside of the play Twelve Angry Men written by Reginald Rose, Juror 8 has the persuasive evidence to change the minds of his fellow Jurors and save a boy from his execution. The other Juror’s seem like they won’t budge with their mind set on the decision of guilty, but after Juror 8 proves his thoughts on the decision of innocent, he may just be able to save a young life.

Larry Watson’s 1993 novella ‘Montana 1948’ tells a tale of loyalty and justice through a young boy living in a town where the justice system is corrupted by family ties and racism. Likewise, in Reginald Rose’s 1954 teleplay ‘Twelve Angry Men’, twelve jurors determine the fate of a boy accused of murdering his father. Although the stories are quite different, Montana 1948 having a strong family dynamic and Twelve Angry Men being a short courtroom drama, ultimately they both explore justice as a theme and how justice can be very subjective and moulded to

Both Montana 1948 and Twelve Angry Men exemplify that justice provides rules and powers and the complex consequences of misusing this in the society. Although they do so in diverse ways. Twelve Angry Men, written by Reginald Rose, demonstrated the misuse of power, when most of the jurors failed to use the different principles of the justice system. In the beginning of the play, eleven out of twelve jurors voted “guilty” towards a crime that had no sufficient evidence. However, after much debate, and the heroic effort of the 8th Juror who gave a “not guilty” verdict, prevented the punishment being wrongfully applied. Similar ideas were explored in Montana 1948, a novel written by Larry Watson. The misuse of power is evidently portrayed by the Hayden’s Family, as they used their good reputations to manipulate the town of Montana and operate above the law. They took advantage of the people who had no influence within the society which resulted in the distortion of facts and the corruption of justice. Whereas each text exhibited that many, but not all characters had shown broad prejudice and tendentiousness against the people who had little power that leads into sophisticated effects such that miserableness, suffering, family breakdown and especially ruining the justice system.

Imagine this, you have just found out that your brother has been touching and molesting innocent Native American women. Would you take initiative and arrest your own and only brother? Or would you sweep everything under the rug because he is your brother? Well, in the novel Montana 1948 by Larry Watson, a young boy, David, learns that his uncle, Frank, a doctor, has been molesting his Native American women patients. It is up to Wes to make a decision of whether or not to go by law or let everything slide. Numerous of readers believe that justice is shown more than loyalty to family in the book because eventually Frank is arrested. However, loyalty to family is shown more than justice because Wes never thought of arresting Frank in the first

Just like in the book Montana 1948, I would like to write to you about how human nature is explained through loyalty and justice. As we have gone to school together for seven years, I would like to show you how the faults of our human nature can be explained through what has happened in Montana 1948. Throughout the book, the faults of human nature are seen as loyalty outweighs justice as seen through Frank molesting Native American girls. His loyalty to his brother, Frank, and his prejudice towards Native Americans questions the belief of justice. He has received all his power from his parents, so it is nearly impossible for him to go against his family. However, Wes is stuck between his father, a powerful, intimidating man and his wife,

Twelve angry men by Reginald Rose is an intriguing play that explores the idea of personal experience affecting ones decision. Indeed Rose shows that decision-making is based on personal experiences. This is evident in the play when the 3rd Juror’s personal experience with his own son influences his decision and as a result he votes for guilty, the 9th Jurors old age becomes one of the greatest factors which influences his judgement of the boy ; when the 5th Jurors personal experience in a slum causes further doubts to form in his mind It is clear throughout the play that personal

Both Reginal Rose and Larry Watson shows the importance of achieving justice in their stories. However, what they achieved is different; justice was attained in 12 angry men, while it doesn't in Montana 1948. The prohibiting factors that makes the justice harder to achieved are the prejudice, bias and misuse of power. They also shows the relationship between power and justice, just in contrasting way.

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.

Twelve Angry Men, is a play written by Reginald Rose. The play is about the process of individuals and a court case, which is determining the fate of a teenager. It presents the themes of justice, independence and ignorance. Rose emphasises these three themes through the characters and the dialogue. Justice is the principle of moral rightness or equity. This is shown through juror number eight who isn’t sure whether or not the boy is actually innocent or guilty, but he persists to ask questions and convinces the other jurors to think about the facts first. Independence is shown through both juror number three and ten. They both believe that the defendant is guilty until they both realise that they can not relate there past experiences with

Justice is something many people deserve, but it is not always what they get. Throughout the novel Montana 1948, by Larry Watson, follows a series of events that take place in the summer of 1948, and is seen through the eyes of a twelve-year-old boy. In the novel a adolescent boy named David witnesses his father, Wesley, choose between loyalty or justice. Due to charges made against Wesley’s brother Frank, Wesley had to confront Frank about the charges that were made against him. Unfortunately, David had to watch as all these problems and secrets unravel which eventually destroyed Frank. Justice was served to Frank although many people were against the idea of Frank receiving his punishment. In addition, justice is also served in the story

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.

In a crowded jury room in downtown New York, opinions collide as discussion about the innocence of a young boy is decided. The dark and foreboding storm clouds that hang over the heads of the jurors are beginning to lift as time progresses and new facts are presented. One juror is not happy about this stay of execution and is holding fast his opinion of guilty. Juror three, the president of his business, refuses to alter his vote or opinion in any way. Still haunted by his own son, juror three verbally assaults the group with a forceful tone and a taciturn attitude. One of twelve, Reginald Rose created them all from the same pen and ink, and they could all be no more different.

In the play “Twelve Angry men”, the story line presents a variety of perspectives and opinions between twelve very different men. Some are more likely to be pointed out as prejudice, and others are more focused on reaching fair justice. Clearly, it is quite difficult for different people to vote ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty’ in unity when coming to a fair decision. In all of the twelve jurors, I have chosen Juror 3 and Juror 8 for contrast and comparison. I believe that Juror number 3 is a very opinionated man, with more differences than similarities comparing with Juror number 8.

Twelve Angry Men is a play that shows the workings of the American Justice System. The play is a celebration of the judicial system, and the main theme of the play is the triumph and the fragility of justice. The defendant’s fate is on the hand of the jurors as the man is accused of a serious offense which is murder. The purpose of the essay is to show the role that the plot, characters and the conflicts among the jurors support the theme of justice. Each juror had an initial verdict when the play begins but as events unfold and conflicts and agreements are reached the final and fair verdict is presented.

Reginald Rose’s ‘Twelve Angry Men’ is a play which displays the twelve individual jurors’ characteristics through the deliberation of a first degree murder case. Out of the twelve jurors, the 8th Juror shows an outstanding heroism exists in his individual bravery and truthfulness. At the start, the 8th Juror stands alone with his opposing view of the case to the other eleven jurors. Furthermore, he is depicted as a juror who definitely understands the jury system and defends it from the jurors who do not know it fully. At the end, he eventually successes to persuade the eleven other jurors and achieves a unanimous verdict, showing his