12 Angry Men Summary

The play that I was reading was called “Twelve Angry Men”, it is written by Reginald Rose. There are two acts in the play. In Act 1 the 12 jurors are in the jury room about to decide whether the 16 year old man who killed his father is guilty or not-guilty. A few minutes later everyone in the room gathered together around the foreman and started the voting. The eleven jurors voted that the boy is guilty but there was only one person who voted not-guilty. Because of this the jurors had to discuss about the trial and finally decide if the boy is guilty or not. The 8th juror (who voted not-guilty) talked to the other jurors telling them that they should decide in a few minutes. This is a very serious situation so he wants them to take at least an hour. Then all of them sat down …show more content…
He was very optimistic about the situation and started questioning the trial. The play was set in the jury room of a court. The reason that this play first started off was because their was a murder case and they were the jury. They had to decide whether or not that the boy is guilty or not-guilty. At the end of the all of the jurors made up their mind and did a FINALLY voting. Once the voting ended they all got their coats and left the room. I feel that the ending was really well because they all made up their mind and stopped arguing about the situation. I feel like it was a really good way to end the play with the 8th juror leaving because he was the one who questioned the trial and without him the play wouldn’t go on. I really liked the play and how it played out. The story was really complex and did keep my on my toes because I wanted to see what the verdict was. The 8th juror really interested me because he did agree with the other jurors straight away. He didn’t think that the boy is not-guilty, but he wanted to know more. So instead of keeping his doubt inside he actually spoke out to the group so he can get his doubt