We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy

See Pricing

What's Your Topic?

Hire a Professional Writer Now

The input space is limited by 250 symbols

What's Your Deadline?

Choose 3 Hours or More.
2/4 steps

How Many Pages?

3/4 steps

Sign Up and See Pricing

"You must agree to out terms of services and privacy policy"
Get Offer

Twelve Angry Men Reflection

Hire a Professional Writer Now

The input space is limited by 250 symbols

Deadline:2 days left
"You must agree to out terms of services and privacy policy"
Write my paper

In the play Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose, juries with very different opinions about life, society and people try to reach a verdict in a murder trial were the defendant, a sixteen year old boy from a bad neighborhood, is sentenced to the death penalty for charges of first degree murder. In the surprisingly entertaining yet inaccurate portrayal of what happens in the jury room, the juries do everything from recreating a witness’s testimony to looking over, and even touching, evidence from the case.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Twelve Angry Men Reflection
Just from $13,9/Page
Get custom paper

As the play progresses, it is mostly clear that the rights of society are put first then the rights of the individual. In conclusion the rights of society and the individual are not very well balanced. Most of the jurors were already set on declaring the boy guilty at the beginning of their discussion because they believed it was the right thing to do for the good of the majority before analyzing all the facts and the testimonies and evidence of the trial.

An example of this is when the third juror makes a comment to the second juror on how the lawyers just kept talking and talking and talking during the trial but then the second juror replies that they were “entitled to”. The third juror replies by saying that, “Sure they are. Everybody deserves a fair trial. […. ] sometimes I think we’re better off if we took these tough kids and slapped ’em down before they make trouble” (Rose 7). Here the third juror says that even though the defendant deserved a fair trial, society was better off if the accused were just taken care of without much trouble.

The rights of society are clearly put first then the rights of the boy who is being tried. By saying this, the third juror means that he would have the Nation defy all the rights of one person just to take a person who has been accused of murder out of the streets for the good of society. Even if the defendant was guilty or not they would give him anything he had a right to and lock him away from society to protect the rights of the majority of security and domestic tranquility. Rose, Reginald. Twelve Angry Men. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.

Cite this Twelve Angry Men Reflection

Twelve Angry Men Reflection. (2016, Sep 17). Retrieved from https://graduateway.com/twelve-angry-men-reflection/

Show less
  • Use multiple resourses when assembling your essay
  • Get help form professional writers when not sure you can do it yourself
  • Use Plagiarism Checker to double check your essay
  • Do not copy and paste free to download essays
Get plagiarism free essay

Search for essay samples now

Haven't found the Essay You Want?

Get my paper now

For Only $13.90/page