Chaos In 12 Angry Men

Yelling, shouting, and arguing all around the room over an opinion causing chaos. When there’s a problem look for a solution and don’t base it off what others supposedly seen or heard. In the play “Twelve angry men” the problem is the jurors are blaming a young boy for stabbing his father with the descriptions from the old man who lived on the second floor right underneath where the murder took place, and the women who happened to get up because it was too hot and lived across the street and supposedly seen the boy stab his father while the train was passing by. Throughout the play all the jurors have their own opinion towards the case but jurors 3, 8, and 10 were the main ones who were causing the case to become chaotic instead of acting like

the adults they were. Juror 3 always had an opinion towards what anyone said which caused a lot of arguing to occur because of course not everyone will have the same opinion. When you base your solutions off a problem upon someone else’s view or structure of wording the situation, it brings more conclusions because you never know if they’re lying to make the person look guilty or if they’re telling the truth. In “the twelve angry men” the jurors used the old man’s perspective view of the case and the lady from across the streets which at the end they were both lying because the young boy was not guilty. The juror’s first’s thoughts about the situation and evidence they had would solve the case right away but there was always at least 1 juror who didn’t agree with the rest.