12 Angry Men
Published 1:00 pm Saturday, October 6, 2007
“Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt — what is reasonable doubt when someone’s life is on the line?”
It’s not the typical watercooler conversation, but when you’re among the “12 Angry Men” in the Reginald Rose play of the same name that opens Oct. 12 at the Whidbey Playhouse — doubt makes all the difference.
Dottie Morgan is directing this show that opens to the booming voice of a judge giving the jurors a list of judgemental advice before sending them off to deliberate on an accusation of murder.
The jurors shuffle in awkwardly — some already a little testy to be there after six days of courtroom testimony.
Soon it’s obvious there are other things on their minds, other than the evidence, that brings tension to the table.
“Six days away from the office, I could lose my job for that,” one gripes.
When they walk into the room, an immediate vote produces an 11-to-1 guilty verdict.
Why look beyond black and white in the case? What does that prove?
“Nothing, it’s just part of the picture,” as one juror said.
There are stubborn personalities that don’t like to be proven wrong — especially when they walked into the room so sure of themselves and the case. The tinge of anticipation builds as the verdict unfolds, keeping audiences on the edge of their seats.
“This show is definitely a character study of these individual jurors,” Morgan said.
Among these jurors called to duty are a few bigoted men, full of prejudices. Among them are a few good men. All aren’t sure how they feel about “those people” the generalized term used for the accused.
Their prejudices — against the defendent and each other — come to the forefront.
Cast member Dan Witko appreciates this label chosen by the playwright.
“It doesn’t focus on one particular group, but instead allows each of the jurors to address their own prejudices toward whatever ‘these people’ might represent to them,” he said.
How can evidence that seemed so solid when they walked into the room dissolve so quickly? Will it solidify in the end? Every new question questions the answers they thought they already had.
But even when the doubt of guilt piles up and topples over into the lap of one juror, he can’t change his mind.
“He’s a real asinine, opinionated person who sticks to his guns and won’t change his mind, even when things reach a breaking point,” Baca said of Juror No. 3.
Baca, who has a background in law, sees the play as altruistic.
“It really gives an inside look at what a jury has to go through,” he said.
Morgan has been lobbying to stage “12 Angry Men” at the Playhouse for a number of years.
“I’ve presented it at ‘Play Day’ where we consider scripts for upcoming seasons at least twice but some sort of conflict always arises,” Morgan said.
Morgan has been enamored with the story since she saw the original CBS live studio run in the late 1950s.
“I was blown away it was so good,” she said.
The director has brought a prime cast of men on board to stage the show. A number of the cast familiarized their timing with each other in last year’s “The Caine Mutiny Court Martial,” more were brought on board in “Our Town,” both directed by Morgan.
Cast member Fernando Duran said the heated scenes in “12 Angry Men” actually come easier because of the trust the cast has in each other.
“It’s like coming out to play with your friends every night,” he said.
The cast bond has also helped them fine-tune the nuances of playwright Reginald Rose’s script.
“There’s a lot of inflection and dramatization that evokes emotion in this play that all takes place in one scene,” Duran said. “You can just feel the emotion coming off these guys.”
