The topic being discussed today is Reginald Roes's "Twelve Angry Men".It sets in on a court hearing where 12 jurors have to decide whether or not a young man is guilty for manslaughter. The piece only shows the jurors in the room where they stay for awhile because they can not come up with an agreement. Eventually after virtual arguements and lots of talking they decide that the young nineteen year old kid is not guilty. Reginald Roses piece of "Twelve Angry Men" can be interpreted of a purpose of showing us that not all justice systems can be fair. This can be seen throughout all three acts. The jurors in Twelve Angry Men even tho eventually becoming fair, didn't even give the little boy a chance at being non-guilty. For example,
