Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 681 views

    12 Angry Men TEEL Paragraph

    Uploaded by

    Alireza Kafaei
    1) In 12 Angry Men, some jurors come into the trial with prejudgments and prejudices against the defendant, a young boy on trial for murder. 2) Juror Eight notes that "prejudice obscures the truth," indicating that biases can prevent jurors from objectively evaluating the evidence. 3) The prejudices of some jurors, like Juror Three who is harshly critical of his own son, influence their certainty about the defendant's guilt in ways that are not logically supported by the facts of the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    12 Angry Men TEEL Paragraph

    Uploaded by

    Alireza Kafaei
    681 views1 page
    1) In 12 Angry Men, some jurors come into the trial with prejudgments and prejudices against the defendant, a young boy on trial for murder. 2) Juror Eight notes that "prejudice obscures the truth," indicating that biases can prevent jurors from objectively evaluating the evidence. 3) The prejudices of some jurors, like Juror Three who is harshly critical of his own son, influence their certainty about the defendant's guilt in ways that are not logically supported by the facts of the case.

    Original Description:

    An essay on the famous book " 12 angry men "

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) In 12 Angry Men, some jurors come into the trial with prejudgments and prejudices against the defendant, a young boy on trial for murder. 2) Juror Eight notes that "prejudice obscures the truth," indicating that biases can prevent jurors from objectively evaluating the evidence. 3) The prejudices of some jurors, like Juror Three who is harshly critical of his own son, influence their certainty about the defendant's guilt in ways that are not logically supported by the facts of the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    681 views1 page

    12 Angry Men TEEL Paragraph

    Uploaded by

    Alireza Kafaei
    1) In 12 Angry Men, some jurors come into the trial with prejudgments and prejudices against the defendant, a young boy on trial for murder. 2) Juror Eight notes that "prejudice obscures the truth," indicating that biases can prevent jurors from objectively evaluating the evidence. 3) The prejudices of some jurors, like Juror Three who is harshly critical of his own son, influence their certainty about the defendant's guilt in ways that are not logically supported by the facts of the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    12 Angry Men TEEL Paragraph

    Cycle 4 Earning Task ( 20 % )

    How does 12 Angry Men show that prejudice can obscure the truth?

    In 12 Angry men by Reginald Rose the author reveals prejudgment and prejudice of the jurors from the
    beginning and even this could be considered as the main theme of the play. Since from the first
    voting the writer indicates how a couple of jurors are certain about the case and this even effect
    other jurors as well .However, this imperative fact that life of a human being is in their hand and
    they are supposed to interpret all the evidences as objectively as possible, is obscured due to
    prejudice and prejudgment of a number of jurors. The precarious nature of absolute certainty can
    also be seen through the prejudiced predispositions of some of the jurors, symbolic of how sometimes
    all the odds can be stacked against the accused due to community attitudes. Juror Eights comment,
    prejudice obscures the truth makes it all the more evident that in this context, innocence would
    be difficult to establish. Even if jurors hold the view that there is not one of them, not one whos
    any good, when referring to the social group of the accused 10th and 3rd are the characters that are
    mostly shown by their opinionated comments about the young boy. It is more palpable in the play
    when juror 3 start to talk about his son whom he made a man out of him , and whom he has
    not met for over 2 years , and this is where the author expertly reveals the key reason of juror 3
    prejudice against the accused boy. Later on juror number 3 is the last one to agree with others even
    reluctantly and the toughest to convince, these are all other examples of how his prejudice controlled
    him and made an illogical certainty about the case . In summary the fact that prejudice obscures the
    truth has been perfectly portrayed throughout the play and during every single conversation of the
    prejudiced characters.

    You might also like