Twelve Angry Men
Characters and their relationship to the theme of Justice, Democracy & the Jury System
By 12D 2013
How does each juror approach
the legal process?
What attributes or threats do
they bring to the jury room?
Does Rose want us to sympathise
or reject their approach?
Juror 1
Takes his role as foreman
seriously and wants to maintain
order
Dislikes a lack of respect in the
room
Rose wants us to sympathise with
his approach as he is reasonable
and appears to be trying to do
the right thing.
2
Quiet
Contained
Only gives his opinion when
asked
Positive attitude towards
reaching the appropriate verdict.
Doesn’t have much input in
discussions and stays silent most
of the time.
Avoids confrontation and tries to
keep everyone happy.
Attribute/threat - doesn’t get
involved or add for fuel to the
heated arguments between
different jurors
3
Disinterested in the case
One-dimensional analysis of the
evidence – unquestioning
approach.
“Listen, all this is just talk. The
boy lied and you know it.” (pg 18)
Through logic and reason; tries to
be very analytical about it.
Solemn approach to the
democratic process – takes it
seriously.
“If you haven’t got anything to
add, besides jokes, I suggest you
listen.” (pg 23)
Threat – he is overpowering and
directs the discussion to suit his
own agenda, which is to send the
boy ‘to the chair’.
Aggression.
Audience is being positioned to
reject his approach. He ‘slingshots’ evidence at the discussion
without questioning or being
open to others’ offerings.
Attributes – objective, focuses on
evidence.
This could also be a threat,
because he doesn’t question
validity of evidence or the
eyewitnesses.
“Let’s stick to the facts.” (pg 9)
We are positioned to sympathise
with his approach because he is
impartial, though he is narrowminded in his pre-occupation
with ‘facts’ – this could also be
rejected by the audience.
5
Shy at the start, quiet.
Open to discussion later in the
text.
Attribute – he shows them how
to handle the knife, which
changes their opinion of the
evidence about the stabbing.
6
Motive-focused. Looks for the
‘why’ in the case.
Doesn’t really make any
arguments. He defends other
jurors, but otherwise offers very
little.
Loathes the idea of being on a
jury.
Would rather do anything than
be there, wastes time. “Brother!
Anybody got a deck of cards?” pg
18
Open minded
Attribute – conducts himself in an
orderly manner, particularly the
9th.
Threat – does not say much,
voted not guilty without
questioning/discussing.
He is loud, crass and disrupts the
progress in the jury room. He
threatens the fair trial and
consideration of the case for the
boy.
We sympathise with him because
he was raised in the slums like
the defendant, and he is able to
show a different perspective to
the other Jurors.
Unsure – possibly we are
positioned to sympathise with
him, as he adds a gentler side to
those who voted guilty.
4
7
8
Attributes – Able to discuss
Doesn’t get involved in the
heated discussions, only offers his
opinion when asked. Positioned
to sympathise but there could
also be an element of audience
rejection because of his lack of
initiative.
Rose wants us to reject his
approach and think of him as the
typical dumb American. He is
portrayed as an ignorant and
irresponsible man.
Rose wants us to sympathise with
9
10
11
12
Willing to contribute
meaningfully
Takes initiative
Questioning
Focused on reasonable doubt
Non-judgemental
Lacking prejudice to the case
Willing to discuss evidence
“I’m willing to put in an hour”
(page 8)
Aggressive
Prejudiced
Self-proclaiming
Closed-minded
Unwilling to change his ways
“I don’t give a goddamn about
the law. Why should I?” ( Page
53)
The democratic process is
important to him; he feels like he
needs to take his role seriously.
“We have a responsibility.” (pg
39)
Does not have personal
prejudices. Initially voted guilty,
maybe this was from fear.
Reasonable & measured.
Conforms to the majority –
changes his vote four times.
Pleasing others, style over
substance.
Superficial approach to the case,
“we’re lucky to get a murder
case”.
evidence and question it; willing
to give the defendant a fair trial.
Juror 8 is the reasons the Jurors
have a long discussion in the first
place.
his approach to the debate.
Attributes – able to stand up and
support Juror 8’s opinions
Ability to discuss and analyse
court evidence in a nonprejudiced way
Threat – Prejudiced re:
class/background of the
defendant
“I say get his kind before his kind
gets us…” (Page 53)
“ These people are born to lie…” (
Page 51)
Rose wants us to sympathise with
Juror 9s approach.
Attribute – ability to discuss, ask
questions that may spark
discussions.
Rose wants to sympathise with
his approach because he is a
foreigner and gets picked on by
others who do have prejudices.
Threat – easily manipulated;
represents mindless conformity
of democracy.
Does not stand up for what he
really believes, just follows
others.
“I have this habit of doodling.”
(pg 9)
Always hesitates before he
speaks. When he changes his
vote, he looks around to see what
others are doing.
We are positioned to reject his
approach – Rose wants us to
value independent thought and
opinion.
Rose wants us to reject Juror 10’s
approach. “You must be an
ignorant man” (#9 to #10)
“You must be a sick man.” (#9 to
#10)