Twelve Angry Men Is Not Guilty

502 Words2 Pages

Twelve Angry Men has the members of a jury needing to decide on a verdict for a young man who is on trial for murdering his father. The punishment for murder is the death sentence, so the stakes are high. At first, the evidence makes the boy very clearly guilty, and most of the jurors agree that he is guilty. Juror #8 votes not guilty, however, because he believes that there is a reasonable doubt. The rest of the play follows the jury discussing evidence and witnesses to the crime. Some of the jurors have little care for human life, and others can not put aside their prejudices. Tensions are high and the temperature is extremely hot outside, so that certainly is not helping everyone’s emotions. In the end, the final verdict is not guilty after much argument Reginald Rose wrote many other teleplays …show more content…

He claimed that he first got the idea for Twelve Angry Men from being in a jury for a manslaughter case. Later in his life, he wrote for a number of television broadcasting companies. The fruit of his efforts was three Emmy Awards and an Oscar. Reginald Rose’s most famous work is by far Twelve Angry Men, which was adapted into a movie and won many awards. His other works include The Bus to Nowhere, The Incredible World of Horace Ford, and This Agony, This Triumph. Directed by Franklin L. Schaffner, Twelve Angry Men was originally a teleplay for the Westinghouse Studio One drama TV series which was performed live for television audiences. The performance of Twelve Angry Men was performed on September 20, 1954, in New York City for season 7 episode 1 of the Studio One series. The protagonist was played by award-winning actor Robert Cummings who played juror #8, and Franchot Tone played juror #3 who is the antagonist. The original recording of the play was missing until 2003 when it was found in the home of a New York defense

Open Document