All the characters in twelve angry men are influenced by their past experiences. I think that most of them do but the handfuls of jurors choose to have equality in the way they go through with their thought process. The main characters that show their prejudices are juror 10 and 3 but we also see the little prejudices the other jurors have, for example juror 5 and juror 4. There are also some characters in the court room that look to keep things equal and keep their prejudices out of their choice making.
Juror 10’s little rampage in pages 51 to 53 of the book really show his thought of people who live in a slum neighbourhood, he talks like they’re from a completely different planet to us, for example he tries to tell to the rest of the court room with a stern voice “They are different. They think different. They act different”. Juror 10 also thinks that people who live in the slums have a different way of life and a different way of resolving problems “They don’t need any big excuse to kill someone. Juror 10’s experiences in the past of people who live in the slums effect his thinking about whether or not he has a reasonable doubt, but when he is set straight he feels embarrassed and it seems he couldn’t care less about the result because he is to ashamed. Another past experience that comes into the court room is juror 3’s past experience with his own kid who was the same age as the boy in the case. ”We did everything for that boy… When he was nine… ran away from a fight… when he was sixteen we had a battle.
He hit me in the face… I haven’t seen him for two years. Rotten kid. “With his past experience with his boy he seems to think that every boy that age is exactly the same “It’s the kids, the way they are nowadays. Angry! Hostile! You can’t do a thing with them” Near the end of the case we find out that juror 3 was voting guilty because he still feels the pain of his boy leaving him and so he tries to take his revenge on this boy but juror 8 says “It’s not your boy. He’s somebody else’s. Juror 3 and juror 10 both have been effected and blinded by their past experiences and their past experience effects their judgement but those past experiences are put to rest by the other jury members.
We have the 2 main jurors who show their past experiences in the court room but we also have 2 jurors who show a hint of past experience with the subject of people who live in slums. The first juror is juror 4. Juror 4 is a neat stockbroker who likes to think that he is all about the facts whether or not he lived in the slums, but we find howing us his past experience on what he thinks the slums are like “Slums are breeding grounds for criminals. ”The other juror who is seen to have a past experience with the slums is juror 5 who lives in the slums and was brought up in the slums, we find juror 5 to becoming really agitated when other jurors talk about people who live in the slums. ”The 5th Juror goes in to the wash-room, slams the door behind him. ”These stage directions happen when juror 10 has a rampage talking about these people multiplying and saying that we should kill one when we have the chance.
Not only do we have people showing their past experiences in the court room but we do a juror who likes to keep things equal and tries to have equality about him. Juror 11 a watch maker from Europe is defending the boy because everyone else is saying that people from the slums are more capable of committing murder so he says “To say that a man is capable of committing murder does not mean he did” “And no matter where you run into it, prejudice obscures the truth. ” In the court room we find the past experiences of juror 10 towards people in the slums and we find juror 3’s past experience with his son effect his vote, making him want revenge.
Juror 5’s past experience and insight of people from the slums and the fact that he was from the slums influenced his vote because he may have been biased. Juror 4, even though he may think he is all facts and figures he shows that he has a past opinion about the slums. Some people in the court room try to help the boy and equal the playing field trying to help the other jurors past experiences not influence them. I do but i also don’t agree that all the character in Twelve Angry Men are influenced by their past experiences.