12 Angry Men Prejudice Essay Essay

What is justice? Justice is a excogitation of moral goodness based on ethics rationality, law, religion or fairness, as well as taking into bet the inborn rights of all human beings and citizens, the right of all throng and individuals to equal guard before the law of their civil rights, without discrimination. Justice is one of the great concerns of humankind. It is some(prenominal)thing for which people oer centuries have been willing to struggle and evening die.Examples of Justice are novels 12 uncivilised Men and The Green Mile. 2 maddened Men is a novel write by Reginald Rose in 1955. The tosh takes place in 1957 in the jury- board of a New York Court of Law. It is about a green delinquent who is on campaign for the murder of his aggressive off the beaten track(predicate)ther. Eleven jurors are directed by the judge to get ahead on a hot afternoon to declare if there is any liable doubt as to why the son is non indictable. One, even though far from convinced of the boys innocence, feels that some of the evidence against him is ambiguous. By the end of the solar day that juror has reversed opinions of all cardinal jurors.Prejudice There are some significant views and values that Reginald Rose demonstrates in 12 Angry Men the most(prenominal) important one being that prepossession constantly affects the truth and peoples judgement. As the jurors designate between themselves as to whether a junior boy is guilty of stabbing his dumbfound it is shown that Its very hard to mention personal preconceived idea out of a thing like this. This is most clear in the way juror 3 and juror 10 come to their ending that the young man is guilty as they bring in there mischief against young people and people from the slums to puzzle out their judgement without considering the f interprets of the case.Rose uses juror 8 who can see the whole footrace because he is calm, reasonable and brings no prejudice as a prime manakin of what a juror i s supposed to be like. Juror 10 is the character who brings in the most prejudice to the jury room as he has formed his purpose from the moment he saw the young boy and sees no reason for him to yearn any time debating on whether the suspect is guilty. His prejudice comes from the fact he apply to live in the slums and consider people like the suspect to be trash.This is schematic when he states you cant bank a word they saythey act different they dont admit any big excuse to buck someone. Juror 10 never truly considers the facts of the case only using them as a pretext to vote guilty and to leave early. When he found it excessively difficult to change peoples opinions he simply gave up and voted not guilty. I couldnt care slight. This shows just how little he cared for the defendants life and the jury organization unlike juror 3 who late cared about the jury system and the case.