Kozlosky 1

Katrina Kozlosky
ENG101
Truth Essay
14 November 2016
12 Angry Men: Who Is Affected by Truth the Most?
The movie 12 Angry Men portrayed how the truth affected a group of people in
different ways. I believe Juror #8 (Henry Fonda) was neutrally affected by truth, Juror #9 (Joseph
Sweeney) was positively affected by truth, Juror #3 (Lee J. Cobb) was the most negatively
affected by truth, and Juror #10 (Ed Bagley) was also negatively affected by truth.
Juror #8 (Henry Fonda) was neutrally affected by truth in 12 Angry Men. He had
reasonable doubt when it came to the whether the 18-year-old Hispanic boy was innocent or
guilty. When the jury first took an anonymous vote, Fonda was the first and only, to vote not
guilty. He provided information that the court did not go over and encouraged the other jurors to
see that there was a possibility that the boy did not commit the murder of his father. This juror
questioned the accuracy of the witnesses and the possibility of how the crime could be
committed under the circumstances. The evidence that he shared was enough to persuade the
others to see the truth of the case, rather than where the boy came from and his stereotypes.
Henry Fondas neutral point of view on the truth may have saved an innocent boys life from
prison time.
The juror most affected positively by truth was Juror #9 (Joseph Sweeney). When the
jury took the second anonymous vote, this juror voted not guilty, alongside Juror #8. He realized

Kozlosky 2
the case was not just a matter of racism or the origin of the boy, but about the facts that were not
mentioned. The discussion opened up because of this juror. His age also contributed to other
jurors around the table to defend his voice and force others to listen to what he had to say. When
the jury took the second anonymous, there had to be another juror, beside Juror #8, to vote not
guilty. Sweeney believed the boy deserved a chance to be heard out. If he had not voted not
guilty, the jury would have told the judge that the boy was guilty because the vote was eleven to
one against the boy. That is why he was affected the most positively by truth.
Juror #3 (Lee J. Cobb) was the most negatively affected by truth. He discriminated
against the boy and refused to absorb any of the new evidence the jury had discovered.
Therefore, he was the last to vote not guilty in the jury. Cobb was a great example of the phrase
the truth is in the eye of the beholder; he only believed what he wanted to believe. He was the
bully of all the jurors. He did not have a problem antagonizing the others to try to get his way.
Essentially, he just wanted a Hispanic from a ghetto off the streets and in prison, despite the
boys potential innocence. Most of the others understood that someones fate rested in their
hands. It was their decision, paired with the Judges, to send the boy off or to let him off the
hook. Cobb did not care about the fate of the boy, as long as he got his way: the boy would be
declared guilty. Eventually, Juror #8 had Cobb prove himself wrong after presenting an argument
that soon led to the contradiction of the evidence provided in the courtroom. This case became
personal for Cobb; he wanted the boy to be guilty, but after he lost his temper and tore up one of
his personal photos, he admitted that the boy was not guilty. I assume that after he left the
courthouse, the truth hung over him like a dark cloud. The truth negatively affected Lee J. Cobb
because his personal life played a role in his decision-making process.

Kozlosky 3
I also found Juror #10 (Ed Bagley) to be negatively affected by the truth. He had a temper
tantrum against the boy because he made the case about race. The reason he refused to vote
guilty before was because he despised people from the slums and wanted them off the streets.
His vote eventually changed after the evidence with the glasses arose. It only took the juror that
rubbed his nose and Juror #9 (Joseph Sweeney) to convince Bagley that the witness that claimed
to have seen the murder happen from across the street needed glasses. Therefore, she may not
have seen what she thought she saw. Bagley wanted to believe that she was right because she
swore on oath and because he also wanted the Hispanic boy to be guilty, because he was so
racist. Truth affected Juror #10 negatively because he only believed what he wanted until he was
proven wrong.
Truth affects people differently and there is not any real way to know whose truth is the
right truth. Each of these men had their own version of the truth and it made them see the case
differently. Juror #8 believed the boy to be not guilty to give him the benefit of the doubt, Juror
#9 saw the boy as not guilty upon being provided with more information, Juror #3 believed the
boy to be guilty because of his personal connection, and Juror #10 saw the boy as guilty because
of his race. New evidence came about that showed the jurors new reason for doubt. If Juror #8
had not voted not guilty, what actually happened that night may not have been discovered and an
innocent boy would have had to pay the price for it. Truth is in the eye of the beholder and
sometimes we need to be shown what the real version of the truth is; 12 Angry Men did an
excellent job of doing just that.