____
Discussions
1) Why do you think the author gives “The
12 Angry Men” as the title of the play ?
Why are these people so angry ? Do you
agree that strong emotions can often affect
our judgment ?
2) Do you find it strange that the truth is
sometimes in the hands of one person ?
Why is it so easy for people to go along
with the crowd ? What lesson should we
draw from this ?
3) Do people always mean what they say
or say what they mean? Should we always
take what people say at face value?
4) Why doesn’t the author give names to
the characters in Part One of Twelve Angry
Men?
About the author
Born in New York City in December of 1920, Rose
enlisted in the Army in 1942. Penning his fist teleplay
For CBS’s Studio One in 1951, it was a mere three
years later that Rose would become the head writer
for that series and create the work that would become
his masterpiece.
Overwhelmed by the intense drama of the jury system
while serving as a juror on a manslaughter case,
Rose success that spawned an even more successful
film in 1957. The film version was nominated for
multiple Oscars including Best Picture and Screenplay,
and marked Rose’s sole credit as co-producer
Background
Reginald Rose (1920- ) is a native
New Yorker, best known as a writer
for television. The Twelve Angry
Men was written in 1954 based on
his experience as a juror. The play
was turned into a movie, with much
abridgement. What distinguished
Rose’s teleplays was their direct
preoccupation with social and
political issues.
Rose is one of the outstanding
television playwrights to emerge
from the "Golden Age" of television
drama anthology series. Rose takes
a place in history at the top of the
craft of television writing.
In addition to other accolades, Rose
was nominated for six Emmy
awards during his career, and won
three.
A jury
A jury is a body of individuals selected and sworn
to inquire into a question of fact and to give their
verdict according to the evidence.
The jury of American and English law most likely
originated in early Anglo Saxon property
proceedings, where a body of 12 knights or
freemen who were from the area, and usually
familiar with the parties, would take an oath and
answer questions put to them by a judge in order
to determine property rights .
A Brief Introduction to the
Judicial System
in the United States
In America, there is a principle guiding a criminal court: the
accused is convicted beyond reasonable doubt. In other
words, innocent until proven guilty.
The jury consists of 12 jurors, selected at random, who will
give an unanimous verdict of guilty or not guilty through
discussion.
If the verdict is guilty, then the judge will give the sentence.
If the verdict is not guilty, then the judge will have to
acquit the accused
About the text
The text is the second part of the play. The play
gives sight into several aspects of the American
court system.: (1)The accused is deemed innocent
until and unless proved guilty beyond reasonable
doubt; (2) The burden of proof is on the
prosecutor;(3)in most cases, the verdict has to be
unanimously reached. The majority of a jury is not
sufficient to find a defendant guilty of a felony;(4)A
trial doesn’t aim at discovering who committed a
particular crime, but rather the innocence or guilt
of the accused. This system is valuable and has
avoided many terrible mistakes like in the case of
this play, but it is not fallible and can in fact be
quite precarious.
expressions
(1) take the cake (AmE) spoken to be worse than
anything else you can imagine.
(2) you bet: of course; certainly; you can be sure
(3) run for one’s life: to leave quickly because your
life is in danger.
(4) run the show: to be in charge of the whole
thing
(5) break the tie: to put an end to a situation
(6) 9 to 3 in favor of acquittal:9 people for acquittal
and 3 against.
unanimous: all agreeing completely
verdict: an official decision made by a
jury about whether someone is guilty
or not guilty of a crime
acquit: to give a decision that someone is
not guilty of a crime
Figures of Speech
Observe these sentences and find out the
grammatical function of each of the italicized
gerund phrase.
1. They are the jury for the trial of a boy charged
with murdering his father.
2. He’s been arrested for muffing, picked up for knifefighting.
3. Let’s stop being so sensitive.
4. …so I was used to wrenching myself away from
friends.
5. Keeping to myself was my way of not forming
attachments that I would only have to abandon the
next time was moved.
Structure of the text
Part 1 ( para.1-8)
The jury proved that the old man couldn’t
have heard the boy yell. And the vote then was nine to three
in favor of guilty.
Part 2 (para.9-62) The jury found some reasonable doubts in
the old man’s testimony. No.3 was agitated by No.8 words
and he even cried out the remarkable angry sentence “I will
you” . The vote became six to six.
Part 3(para.63-114) No.8 proved another important piece of
testimony against the boy impossible. No.5 also made by the
boy. The vote accordingly changed to be 9-3 in favor of
acquittal.
Part 4 (para.115-164) The jury discussed the woman’s
testimony and found some reasonable doubts in her words.
Eleven jurors agreed that the boy is not guilty in the end.
No.3 who persisted his own idea for a while finally changed
his vote.
Word Study
court criminal : a court dealing with
criminal cases involving crimes
cf: civil court: a court dealing with cases
involving private legal matters
juror: a member of a jury.
foreman: the leader of a jury.
jury: a group of up to 12 people, called “jurors”
whose duty is to listen to the evidence given in
a court trial and decide whether the accused is
guilty or not guilty.
preliminary: happening before sth. that is more
important, often in order to prepare for it;
preparatory
to serve a jail term: to spend time in prison as a punishment
(also: to serve a sentence; to serve time)
flimsy: thin,weak feeble as in “flimsy dress”, “flimsy cloth”,
“flimsy building”, “flimsy evidence”, “flimsy argument”, “flimsy
excuse” etc.
listening while the evidence spilled out.
to spill out: to come out in a large amount
plain stupid
(infml) simply, completely stupid
Look, there was one alleged eyewitness to this
killing…someone else claimed that…
alleged: supposed to be true although there is no proof
to claim: to state as a fact even though it has not been
proved
I kept putting myself in the kid’s place. If I was on trial for my
life, I’d want my lawyer to tear the prosecutor’s evidence to
shreds.
to put oneself in sb’s place: to imagine myself to be in sb’s
position
Sentence Paraphrase
Maybe we can all get out of here.
No.7 means that if everyone agrees that
the boy is guilty, then they can take the
verdict to the court and get the whole thing
over and done right away. He is eager to
get out of this jury room because it is hot
and besides he has a ticket for a football
game for that evening which he does not
want to miss. These interesting details
have been cut out with great reluctance
because the text is too long for our purpose
…we’ve
got to send him to the chair.
…we’ve got to send him to the electric chair (to be
electrocuted )
Now we know where we are.
Now we know what everybody’s attitude is.
That’s old enough.
The boy is old enough to be held legally responsible
for his actions. He has reached the legal age for which
the law can punish him for his crimes.
I just think we owe him a few words.
The society has not treated the boy very well. Therefore
we should at least talk a little bit before we send him
to the chair. The boy has a right to that. We should do
it for him.
If her testimony don’t prove he’s guilty, the nothing does.
I think her testimony is strong enough to prove he’s
guilty.
Notice the use of “don’t” instead of “doesn’t” showing
No.10’s educational background.
You don’t believe the boy’s story. How come you believe
the woman’s? She’s one of THEM, too, isn’t she?
No.8 is pointing out a flaw in No.10’s logic. No.10 first
says that you can’t believe those slum people, then he
begins to quote one of those people’s testimony, but he
is not aware of his self-contradiction.
Post-reading discussion
Do you find it strange that the truth is
sometimes in the hands of one person?
Why is it so easy for people to go along
with the crowd? What lesson should we
draw from this?
writing
The Danger of Prejudice
What is prejudice in your opinion?
What harm does prejudice do?
Is it possible to be an unprejudiced person?