Juror Nine In 12 Angry Men

Based on the development of the personalities of the jurors so far in Act One, I think that juror nine will be most likely to side with juror number eight. Through examining the text presented in Reginald Rose’s play 12 Angry Men, I can infer that juror number nine is most likely to side with the adamant juror eight’s opinion on the verdict of the boy since nine’s opinions, though minimal, shed a miniscule light on his vast inner thoughts on the case. An example of this would be when juror number nine is inputting his view on how fast everyone is moving with the decision of the case when he says “It’s only one night. A man may die” (Rose 25). In other words, juror number nine does not believe that a man’s life should be taken for granted and

blantly taken from him so fast, despite what is against him, the least he deserves is a few more hours of life. Not only does juror nine believe in fairness to the boy, I am also able to infer that he believes the other jurors on the case should place their racist feelings towards the boy and where he grew up aside as they truthfully rule either guilty or not guilty for the boy. This is shown when juror number nine states “Since when is dishonesty a group characteristic? You have no monopoly on the truth” (Rose 16)! Let me paraphrase that, juror number nine does not like how assumptions are made about the defendant based on physical attributes and past experiences, and he does not believe that juror number ten should alter what the other jurors might or might not feel. Through evidence projected in the play 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose, it is abundantly clear that juror number nine sides with juror number eight in the second vote against verdicts through his outstanding view on the amount of time given to the verdict making and the racism present in throughout the jurors in a cheap attempt to kill a man for no reason that is yet explicitly present.