Ethos, Logos And Actions In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men

Improved Essays
In his play Twelve Angry Men, Reginald Rose brings us back in time to 1957, to a jury room of a New York Court of Law where one man, Juror #8, confronts the rest of the jury to look at a homicide case without prejudice, and ultimately convinces Juror #2, a very soft-spoken man who at first had little say in the deliberation. Throughout the play, several jurors give convincing arguments that make one think about whether the boy is “guilty” or “not guilty.” Ultimately, one is convinced by ethos, logos, and pathos. We can see ethos, logos, and pathos having an effect on Juror #2 as he begins as a humble man and changes into someone brave at the end. Although all three modes play a part in convincing Juror #2, pathos is the most influential because …show more content…
Juror #2 is a bank clerk. A bank clerk usually has a lot of responsibilities like “recording and organizing loan information, preparing the monthly balance sheets of checking customers, and working on international accounts”(“Bank Clerk Job Description”). They also tend to work alone. It is Juror #2’s first time doing jury duty and he begins to face the opinions of many men, including the very forceful Juror #3. He is the first person to talk to Juror #2 about the case. He asks, “How’d you like it?” in which Juror #2 responds mildly, “I don’t know, it was pretty interesting”(Rose 7). Juror #3 then says that he was “falling asleep” and that he has done jury duty many times before and that it amazes him that lawyers can talk so much about nothing. Contradicting his opinion troubles Juror #2 and causes him to respond meekly. He also does not have a lot of power in the room, which contributes to his guilty vote. When the foreman said, “All those voting “guilty” raise your hands,” Juror #2 immediately looks around the room and saw some hands raise and then raises his own hand (11). Because of his unassertive personality, he is vulnerable to the other juror’s opinions. Although he is extremely timid, he starts to gain his voice because he is starting to get tired of being pushed aside by Juror #3 and begins to participate …show more content…
Some of the arguments and issues with the case that he seems to care most about are the knife Juror #8 bought that is similar to the murder weapon and how fast it took the elderly man to get to the door. In Act 1, Juror #4 begins to explain that the knife used is very unusual. That even the store-keeper that sold the knife had never seen a weapon like that before. Juror #8 then argues that someone could have possibly gotten a knife similar to the one the boy had and then “reaches into his pocket and swiftly withdraws a knife...they are exactly alike”(23). Juror #2 finds it “interesting that he’d find a knife exactly like the one the boy bought”(24). Afterwards, the 8th Juror suggests that the elderly man, one of the witnesses, lied because of the point Juror #3 tried to make. Juror #3 says, that the elderly man “[ran] to his door and [saw] the kid tearing down the stairs fifteen seconds after the killing”(42). Juror #8 then suggests that the elderly man could not have done that because of his stroke. He then decides to recreate what the elderly man said he did on the night of the murder. Juror #2 seems really interested in this argument and even volunteers to help with the timing of the experiment. In the beginning of Act 2, the jury decides to vote once more. At the time, Juror #2’s vote was “not guilty.” Even though Juror #2 changes his vote to “not guilty,”

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    The jury was attacking him because they believed that it was impossible for the knife (murder weapon used to kill the boys’ father) to fall out of the boys’ pocket; and the same knife shows up and is used to kill his father. Juror eight proved that the boy could be telling the truth. For instance, the jurors told juror eight that the knife was very unusual and that they have never seen one like it. Juror eight then uses proof to back his argument by pulling out the same knife; he then says, “I went walking for a couple of hours last night. I walked through the boys’ neighborhood.…

    • 1678 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    This wasn 't because he definitely thought the boy was not guilty, he said he didn 't know whether he was or not which is considered a reasonable doubt. This set a lot of the jurors off because a lot of them just wanted everything to be done so they could go home. Other jurors just couldn 't believe and got mad that juror #8 voted not guilty. Once juror #8 convinces the rest of the jury to discuss it further before they make a decision, the personal bias of some of the jurors really came out. For example juror #10 comes out and says, “I don’t mind telling you this, mister.…

    • 1003 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    They must agree unanimously to either acquit the boy of his father’s murder or to send him to the electric chair. The men are torn between supporting and conflicting evidence. They must weave their way through the facts and reach a verdict. One of the facts that came into question was about a star witness. The old man that lived below the father and son gave his testimony in the courtroom.…

    • 963 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Why would he lie? What’s he got to gain, Nine: Attention maybe?” Eight makes a good statement when saying that the Old man’s view doesn’t make sense due to the El train blocking his view and hearing. Nine tends to agree with Eight saying that the old ma In the beginning of the play almost every Juror in the room picks “Guilty” except for Juror Eight. He believes that the boy is “Not-Guilty” saying that the evidence is somewhat false. Of course the other Jurors don’t believe it.…

    • 608 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The play is set in a New York City Court of Law jury room. The play opens to the empty jury room, and the Judge’s voice is heard. The judge is giving a set of final instructions to the twelve jurors. It’s a murder case, the jurors have to find if the boy is guilty for the murder of his own father and that if it requires sentence for the defend to be death penalty. After all these instructions and all other things that jurors did taking a short break, complaint about the room it’s hot, without air conditioning and the fan also doesn’t work too.…

    • 943 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The jury go in to the jury room, sit down, and take a vote. The defendant is found guilty eleven to one, but since the vote has to be unanimous someone must be persuaded in to agreement with the other side. Either eleven men must change one vote, or one man must persuade eleven men to change their vote. And to the surprise of the other eleven men on the jury, it…

    • 1731 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    The movie “12 Angry Men” opens to the jury room and fills with twelve juries’ arguments and complain over the murder case. The case was about whether an eighteen year old boy should be found guilty or not guilty about his action. He was accused of killing his father by stabbing him with a knife. The boy’s life is depended on the twelve juries, and those juries are gathered in all different work fields with a little knowledge in criminal justice. The juries began its deliberations; they started to vote and all the jury vote “guilty” except for one, voted “not guilty”.…

    • 1353 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    With Juror Eight’s backing, Juror Five brings up that any experienced knife fighter wouldn’t handle a switchblade in the way that it was handled during the murder. Another vote is now taken, resulting in nine votes in favor of not guilty with three in favor of guilty. The next case proven wrong comes from the woman across the el tracks. She says she saw the murder happen but would not have been wearing her glasses at the time so she must have simply seen a blur. Juror Eight says, “Now maybe she honestly thought she saw the boy kill his father.…

    • 793 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He is racism, not proper thinker, abusive, prejudice, arrogant, insensitive and biased. Most of jurors doesn't like him based on his opinion and speech was disturbs the rest of juror. Changes his mind when all the others jurors are against him and specifically when jury 4 tells him to keep quite and not to speak. Juror 11 was interested to be a jury because he has witnessed great injustices that happen before. He was described as a good decision maker, rational thinker, supportive, team player, open-minded, agreeable and good natured.…

    • 1243 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Set in New York, 12 Angry Men follows twelve jurors as they decide whether or not a young 18-year-old Hispanic boy is guilty for stabbing his father in the chest. In a rather small room, the jurors must reach a unanimous decision, and if there is ‘reasonable doubt,’ the young boy will be freed. In one of the initial scenes, a vote is facilitated where 11 jurors find him guilty, and one juror, juror 8 votes that he is not guilty. He expresses to the group that a discussion needs to be made prior to sending a young boy to the death penalty. There is a lack of evidence which supports why the young 18-year-old boy stabbed his father and in turn leaves some of the minds of the jurors in a place where they are unable to convict within moral certainty.…

    • 1180 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays