Concept of Justice in ‘12 Angry Men’ and ‘To Kill A Mockingbird’

Justice is not a simple issue of right or wrong. When you look at it more closely, it is far more complicated. Justice is defined as “the quality of being just or fair, the act of determining rights and assigning rewards or punishment.” This may generalize the meaning of justice but when it is further looked at it arises different concepts, as to why it is so complex.

There are many aspects of justice that we may question; i.e. Do people have different moral reasoning? Are people given a fair trial? Is prejudice present in justice?

Much of the issue of justice is very controversial and raises questions such as whether the combination of different outlooks makes a just result.

In the texts To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee and 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose, these concepts or questions are supported and explored in depth supporting the conclusion that justice is complex.

The nature of justice is complex when further investigated. It allows for discussion around different concepts supporting this statement including the involvement of prejudice. Prejudice is an unjustified attitude or opinion, usually, a negative one, directed toward an individual for something the individual cannot control.

A text that supports this concept of prejudice is the novel To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee. In the novel, Tom Robinson’s trial deals with the fact that it is the majority's word over the minorities which in this case is the whites' word over the blacks. Atticus maintains justice in this case, by looking at the evidence rationally as opposed to just assuming he was guilty because of his race. By doing this he found holes in the evidence which he then pointed out to the rest of the jury, whilst also urging them to be fair to Tom in reaching a verdict based solely on the fact of the trial and how equal treatment of every citizen is required in a court of law.

A technique used to portray this scene in the novel is foreshadowing. Foreshadowing is a literary device in which a writer gives an advance hint of what is to come later in the story. An example of this is when the people of Maycomb are shown to harbor feelings of racism toward African-Americans. This is demonstrated by their living in separate areas away from the white community, they also are required to attend a different church and the children do not get to attend a white school.

This technique is used to highlight prejudice in the Tom Robinson case as well as to show the complexity of justice. This technique affects Tom’s well reason defense against being accused of raping a white girl, Mayella Ewell. Unfortunately, it is unsuccessful due to the injustice and prejudice of black people in Maycomb when facing whites. The foreshadowing of Maycomb reveals the corrupt society and ignorance towards people who are different.

Another example of a technique is an allusion.

An allusion is a figure of speech that makes a brief reference to a historical or literary figure, event, or object. An allusion is always indirect.

Miss Gates states, “Adolf Hitler has been after the Jews and he’s puttin’ em in prisons and he’s taking away all their property and he won’t let any of ‘em out of the country and he’s washin’ all the feeble-minded“ (Pg. 327-328). This allusion is to Adolf Hitler and the persecution of the Jews. It shows how innocent people around the world are being convicted for no reason. To some extent, this allusion is ironic because the students and Miss Gates acknowledge racial prejudice outside their hometown but not in their own town. This technique helps to enhance the theme of racial prejudice and shows you how ignorant and oblivious people are to it. When this occurs it makes justice complex in the way that no one realizes that anything wrong is happening, therefore they believe that the outcome is just. This then provides support for the idea that justice is not a simple issue of right and wrong. When you look at it more closely, it is far more complex.

Another related text that suggests justice is complex through the concept of prejudice is the play 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose. 12 Angry Men clarifies the tendency to allow prejudice to influence decision-making. In this story, twelve jurors serving in a murder trial show how their own prejudices reflect their decisions as they attempt to base their votes on their racist feelings toward the defendant. For example, Juror 3 says, “That man's a dangerous killer. You could see it.” Here, he is assuming that a killer must 'look' a certain way, indicating his prejudice against those who look like the defendant. He follows that comment with the statement: “They sent him to reform school for stabbing someone.” This idea assumes that because the kid might have stabbed someone in the past, he is certainly guilty in this case. The remaining jurors expected one, all voted guilty before discussing the evidence. Juror 8 started out as the only man on the jury that had any second thoughts about the boy's guilt. He, much like Atticus, looked at the evidence rationally and found gaps in that evidence which he pointed out to the rest of the jury. This was a result of juror No.8 holding no prejudiced thoughts compared to the remaining eleven.

Juxtaposition is used in this text to help support the idea of how prejudiced thoughts affect an overall situation. Juxtaposition in literary terms is the showing contrast by concepts placed side by side

The technique of juxtaposing juror 3 to juror 8 affects the final outcome of the verdict as juror 8 fought without prejudice as compared to juror 3.

12 Angry Men supports the idea of how someone's prejudiced thoughts get in the way and affect upholding justice which therefore reveals the complex nature of justice.

The nature of justice is complex when further looked into. It brings up different concepts supporting this statement including the involvement of prejudice. This is further supported by the texts To Kill A Mockingbird and 12 Angry Men, as they display acts of prejudice and how they distort justice.

Fairness in justice is defined as an ability to ensure that all individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty. However, fairness is not always constant in justice as everyone is not given a fair trial. This adds to the reasons why justice is so complex.

Atticus knows it’s the right thing to do to defend Tom Robinson despite of his color. In addition to giving helpful advice, Atticus reminds the jury for the last time to give this man a chance. In chapter 20, Atticus knows that the jury will make a biased decision. In his last plea to the jury, Atticus says ”… I am confident that you gentleman will review without passion the evidence you have heard, come to a decision and restore this defendant to his family…. In the name of God, believe him.” Atticus acts justly to Tom Robinson by doing his best to give him a fair trial. However, Tom Robinson did not receive a fair trial due to the racism he obtained from the people of the jury. This later led to him being wrongly convicted of a crime he did not commit and being sentenced to the death penalty. Despite Atticus’s strong case, Tom became a victim of racial injustice and therefore did not receive a fair trial.

A language technique used in the scene of the novel is pathos. Pathos is a technique that evokes feelings of pity or sorrow in the reader. It is used in this scene by making the reader feel sorry or sad for Tom as he had done nothing wrong but despite that, he was still punished. It demonstrates that though people may be given a fair trial a fair result is not always obtained.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

However, the opposite result was attained in 12 angry men. In the play, fairness was a major theme. An example of fairness is how Juror 8 fought for the equality of the suspect. All of the other jurors were going to convict the defendant without a fair trial, instead, they convicted him to what they thought was just or right by them. Juror 8 ignored the background of the defendant and encouraged discussion before the conviction. This showed fairness by him putting effort in to treat the defendant the same, regardless of race and the other juror's opinions of him.

By providing these two examples it is easy to see that justice is complex. Recognizing that all cases vary, with different jurors and prejudices, we get a greater understanding that justice is not what it seems and when further looked into it reveals just how complex it can be.

Moral reasoning is a process of trying to determine the difference between right and wrong. The way someone was raised or the experiences they have faced could be what molds certain beliefs. Morals differ from person to person resulting in people having different views and understandings in the way they perceive right and wrong. This makes it difficult to reach a just result, adding to the statement that justice is complex.

To Kill A Mockingbird shows the concept of moral reasoning which differs between a person and a situation. For example, Jem tells Scout that “We shouldn’t do that tonight…” (page 74-75), referring to their earlier incident in the Radleys’ yard. Jem feels guilty about tormenting Boo Radley because of higher moral reasoning. He is beginning to develop a sense of morals and realizes that harming Boo is wrong, whilst Dill doesn’t consider anything to be wrong with the incident.

Another example of a difference in moral reasoning is in chapter 26. Scout uses a simile to describe the way that Tom Robinsons’s verdict and tragic death have affected them, by saying

''The events of the summer hung over us like smoke in a closed room.''

Similes use 'like' or 'as' to make descriptive comparisons. Scout describes the heavy feelings as being like trapped smoke. Scout understands that her verdict of Tom was wrong as compared to the rest of Maycomb, as she has a higher moral reasoning. This is due to Atticus teaching her the difference between right and wrong, through life experiences. This has given her a different understanding than the rest of the town resulting in her final thought.

This shows that different understandings and moral reasoning affect how one perceives a situation. In justice many people are involved, each with their own moral reasoning making it hard to maintain justice without any complexities.

Like To Kill A Mockingbird, the play 12 Angry Men is another perfect example of how moral reasoning can distort justice. To further understand moral reasoning I will provide an example of Lawrence Kohlberg’s stage theory of moral development and how different jurors symbolize each stage. This will provide evidence of how people have different thought processes for reaching different conclusions, again supporting the statement that justice is complex.

Kohlberg’s theory consists of six stages, which focus on the thinking process that occurs when one decides whether a behavior is right or wrong.

Stage 1: Obedience/Punishment

In stage one, moral judgement is less based on reasoning and more on fear of punishment; the individual will obey in order to avoid punishment. Juror 12 is the most uncertain of all jurors, changing his vote three times with barely any opinion on his own. He is most concerned about being on the ‘right’ side of the argument according to the jury room and less on the right side of the trial.

Stage 2: Self-interest

This is the stage of independence. A person's moral judgment revolves around themselves and they act according to what is best for them. All throughout the play, Juror 7 is more concerned with his tickets to a Yankees game than he is with the trial. His moral reasoning is based on his personal need to come to a quick decision. Even when he finally changes his vote, it is because he sees the jury room shifting and makes the decision that allows him to get to his game faster.

Stage 3: Conformity

At this stage, a person's moral reasoning is determined by social approval. The individual wants to maintain or win the affection and approval of others by being a “good person.” Juror 11 is an immigrant, he makes a point of being polite and it's clear that it's important to him to be accepted. He changes his vote early in the play, agreeing to the reasonable doubt. He wants to be seen as a ’good person’ so he follows the mindset or role of Juror 8.

Stage 4: Authority and Order

Moral decision-making becomes more than consideration of being accepted by others. The individual believes that rules and laws maintain the social order that is worth preserving. Juror 4 is one of the last to change his vote stating that an eyewitness is proof that remains despite all the doubt. After all, there can be no doubt a person has died, and Juror 4 is reluctant to let the issue go easily.

Stage 5: Social Contract

At this stage, a person starts to question both the morality of others and the nature of rules. It becomes more important to make exceptions rather than follow a set of rules that may not be in everyone's favor. Juror 8 wants to discuss the evidence of the trial. Throughout the play, he shows that he understands the details of the case and also the arguments of the other jurors. He doesn’t care about the verdict only that it is just.

Stage 6: Universal Principles

The last stage is the point where a person develops their own moral principles and follows them regardless of the law. This type of reasoning involves taking the perspective of every person or group that could potentially be affected by the decision. The play doesn't demonstrate a good example of this, mostly because the situation doesn't call for it. Kohlberg believes that few people ever reach this stage.

Moral reasoning can't be avoided in justice. It is something everyone has and uses differently, therefore many opinions arise bringing different outlooks. In doing this, justice becomes more complex.

Justice is not a simple issue of right and wrong. When you look at it more closely, it is far more complex. The internet defines justice as “the quality of being just or fair, the act of determining rights and assigning rewards or punishment.” This may generalize the meaning of justice but when it is further looked at it arises different concepts, as to why it is so complex.

There are many aspects of justice that we may question; i.e. Do people have different moral reasoning? Are people given a fair trial? Is prejudice present in justice?

In the texts To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee and 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose, these concepts or questions are supported and explored in depth supporting the conclusion that justice is complex.