‘True story’ that inspired writer of 12 Angry Men is revealed as a work of pure fiction

THE writer of the classic film 12 Angry Men claimed it was based on his own experience as a juror of successfully fighting against the decision of a jury to convict the accused of manslaughter.

However, new research suggests that this claim, and the movie itself, is pure fiction.

Professor Phil Rosenzweig, author of a forthcoming biography, has identified the manslaughter case the film was purportedly based on – only to discover that Reginald Rose was not among its jurors.

The 1957 film starred Henry Fonda, right, as a lone dissenter who bravely convinces his fellow jurors that a teenager accused of killing his brutish father is innocent, despite evidence presented by the prosecution.

Speaking about the case, Rose later recalled: “I was on a jury for a manslaughter case, and we got into this terrific, furious, eight-hour argument in the jury room. I was writing one-hour dramas… then, and I thought, wow, what a setting for a drama.” He never named the case, but he offered clues, including being “called for jury duty to the Foley Square courthouse in the spring of 1954” for a trial involving “a Bowery bum”, an alcoholic or homeless person.

He said of the defendant: “Everybody had him guilty, but on what count? The side I was on battled for assault because the guy he injured didn’t take care of his injuries… His wounds became infected, and he died three days later.

We prevailed, and the judge said we were absolutely right.”

Rose’s account is now challenged by evidence presented in the book Reginald Rose and the Journey of 12 Angry Men to be published on Sept 28.

Its author is business professor at the Institute for Management Development in Lausanne, where he uses 12 Angry Men to teach executives.

By comparing Rose’s clues to court records, he identified the trial of The People v. William Viragh, held at Foley Square courthouse in spring 1954 but could not find Rose listed as a juror.

Prof Rosenzweig believes that Rose was summoned for jury duty, but was not actually picked for that trial: “He must have been at court to even know about this case because it involves the death of a very obscure person.

“It was not reported in newspapers. As a good dramatist, he used his imagination.”