Jury In “Twelve Angry Men” Essay

i. Why is it so difficult for the jury in Twelve Angry Men to bother its final verdict? rosiness shows that in Twelve Angry Men it is difficult to prepare a verdict when jurors essenti onlyy stick out pre conceived ideas and bring individualised outrage in a case, along with jurymans that lack pursual. These factors undoubtedly cause conflict and difficultness in the panel remains, which highlights a potential weakness in the classless process. The trouble also arises from the fact that jurywoman 8 is sensation of the a few(prenominal) jurymans to initially contend honestly and thoughtfully and nabks to obtain justice. Rose suggests that at that place needs to be busy participation In ensuring the jury establishment operates as intended, and when there is, the final verdict is easier to achieve. Rose suggests that it is hard for the Jury to shoot its verdict when jurors have pre-conceived ideas and show racism.Rose showcases the trouble in undivideds having pers onal prejudice in a case as it rouse blind them from the facts. This in turn, hinders the jurymans to get along to an agreement, as it thwarts their ability to reason and perk things from others point of view. This notion is highlighted by dint of the bitter Juror 10, who Is the embodiment of racism and prejudice. Juror 10 signifies the potential power of racism, as he believes the kids who crawl outta those places are real trash. Ultimately, this pre conceived idea creates difficulty in constructing a rational opinion on the case, as this public opinion closes the gateway on his ability to think from another(prenominal) perspective. In addition, It is difficult for him to reach an agreement as he isnt prepared to dissect the facts from the fancy.This is yet underpinned, as he burnt see the evidence from another perspective, as he is sick and tired of facts. His inability to consider another point of view articulates his close-minded character, that cant see past times hi s racism and pre conceived ideas. His resentment and bitterness is manifested in his behaviour, as he is all at once angry or disgusted. This allows Rose to condemn those who cant see past their prejudice and justify why it is difficult for him to make out to an arrangement as his anger showcases his irrational and illogical character. Through Juror 10 Rose suggests that when individuals bring pre-conceived ideas and arnt prepared to deliberate truthfully it is difficult to beget to an unanimous verdict.Rose also underpins the difficulty in coming to a final verdict by showcasingindividuals that bring personal prejudice in a case. Through juror 3, Rose underlines the effect personal prejudice can have on ones ability to deliberate fairly. Juror 3s emotional baggage hinders him from being adequate to go done the representative process properly and determine the iniquity or innocence of the defendant. Rose suggests that without careful deliberation it is hard to go in to an a greed verdict as prejudice prevents individuals from carrying out their civic duty. Juror 3s personal prejudice and experience is highlighted through his impression that the defendant has got to burn, which suggests that it is hard to see ideas from anothers view point, if an individual is more touch on with their personal problems.The difficulty in reaching a final verdict for juror 3 is underlined through his inability to find out to the other Jurors opinions, and is all able to agree with those who see it from his point of view. This is underlined through him constantly agreeing with those who criticize the boy as he comments listen to this man. He knows what hes talking about and thats absolutely right. His personal prejudice prevents him from having an broadcast mind about the other Jurors opinions and can only agree with those who criticize the defendant. Through this, Rose comments on how difficult it is to reach a final verdict when Jurors that show prejudice arent open minded and arnt spontaneous to discuss alternative ideas.Rose underlines how difficult it can to be reach a final verdict when individuals show a lack of interest for the case and arnt prepared to think for themselves. Rose implies that those who arnt willing to take the case seriously are a danger to the system and make it a struggle to deal to a final agreement. Juror 7 is apathetic to the jury process, as he is more concerned with his own welfare than deliberating honestly and discussing the case. He represents those who place self interest above civic duty, which makes it harder for him to contribute to the final verdict outcome.His impatience and belief that discussing the case better be fast articulates his self centered character and how he is more concerned with his own personal desires. In addition, it is through Juror 6 that contributes to the difficulty in coming to an unanimous verdict, as he isnt prepared to think for himself. His lack of confidence and inability to c ontribute to the case is highlighted through him saying he isnt employ to supposing. Rosesuggests that in order for a verdict to be reached, all members must participate in an open intervention.While it is difficult to reach a final verdict, Rose suggests that the jury system requires participation in order for a verdict to be achieved. Juror 8 is one of the few Jurors that is prepared to stand up against the majority and defend the democratic process. It is difficult to reach a final verdict as Juror 8 initially is the only one who sees this as grave duty as the death sentence is mandatory. He shows his concern for the case as he provokes discussion and seeks to obtain justice. However, it is when many of the other jurors arnt able to follow the process suggests that coming to an agreement is hard without active participation.It is through the active participation that allows the process to thrive and make it easier to come to a verdict. This is evident through quiet Jurors such as Juror 2 to participate and make a contribution to the case, making it easier to come to a final verdict. This is highlighted as he questions evidence about the course about the stab wound and how it was made. His ability to participate in discussion suggests that participation is essential in coming to a final verdict. In addition, Juror 9s involvement picks up on the over-the-hill ladys eyesight, which is a leading factor to the final verdict. then Rose stresses that in order for a final verdict to be reached, participation is required from the jury system. In addition, without contribution it makes it difficult to come to an agreement.Rose stresses how difficult coming to a unanimous agreement is when Jurors have pre conceived ideas, prejudice, racism and arnt interested in taking an interest in the case. However, he suggests that when Jurors make a contribution and actively participates an agreement is finally reached.