Familiar faces in a must-see version of a classic tale
THEY say that there are three sides to every story — one side, the other side and the truth. Sometimes uncovering the latter is quite literally a matter of life and death.
When it comes to the justice system, getting to the real story is more important than ever but even the most straightforward of trials have their twists and turns. Prosecution and defence are obliged to tell the truth but both will weave that truth in a way that best benefits their case.
When a jury is sworn in, the participants are tasked with listening to one side, then the other, and ultimately deciding what is the truth. The prosecution are tasked with presenting the facts as they see them, while the defence is tasked with sowing the seeds of ‘reasonable doubt’.
This term is at the heart of all trials — the traditional standard of proof that must be exceeded to establish the defendant’s guilt so clearly that they must be accepted as fact by any rational person.
But there’s no doubting that it’s an ambiguous concept, especially when there are many different personalities at play.
Twelve Angry Men shows just how easily it can be misunderstood.
Set solely in the jury room after a three-day trial, we’re introduced to the members as they take a vote on the guilt or innocence of a young man charged with murdering his father. If found guilty, he will be sentenced to the electric chair.
Eleven immediately go for guilty, with just one juror, Number 8, holding out. When challenged by his cohorts, he insists that if it was his life hanging in the balance, he’d like to think a bit of thought went into deciding his fate.
Indulging him somewhat, the others outline the strong case from the prosecution — one neighbour who saw the killing through a window while a train was roaring past. Another who heard the son telling the father he’d kill him, followed by the sound of a body hitting the ground and then witnessing the son running away.
A murder weapon that was a distinctive knife bought by the accused just days before. An unconvincing
Twelve Angry Men
Bord Gais Energy Theatre Until Saturday Verdict: A riveting watch ))))*
alibi. All elements, they argue, that prove the suspect’s guilt.
But what if reasonable doubt could be introduced into each of these elements, Number 8 asks, before beginning to pick holes in each one.
As he unravels the prosecution case piece by piece — not disproving it, but showing what else could have happened — the other jurors start to waver in their belief too.
As vote after vote is taken, the numbers begin to slowly change. In the ensuing debates, they also begin to reveal aspects of their personalities that could indicate why they were so quick to judge.
Set at a time when fair trials were often hard to come by, especially if you were of a certain colour or creed, the story shows the importance of just one person standing up for what’s right.
The 1957 film of the same name, directed by Sidney Lumet and starring Henry Fonda, is regarded as one of the finest movies ever made, as much for the message at the heart of it as the film itself.
THIS stage version is equally strong. Set entirely in one room, with all 12 actors on stage for the entire show — with a foreman sitting just outside — the chemistry between the actors is palpable.
Every word is delivered precisely, every move is perfection. A sense of tension grows throughout, fuelled solely by the atmosphere emanating from the stage.
Many of the faces will be familiar from TV — Jason Merrells (Emmerdale, Clocking Off, Queer As Folk), Tristan Gemmill (Coronation Street, Casualty), Michael Greco (Eastenders, Holby City), Ben Nealon (Soldier Soldier, The Bill) and Gary Webster (Hollyoaks, Family Affairs, Minder) to name a few.
But their strength is in how they work together, building to a thrilling finale that will have you on the edge of your seat.
Highly recommended.