Theatre Casting Call for "Twelve Angry Jurors" Show

He/she votes "not guilty" during the jury's first vote. Described as "thoughtful" and "gentle," Juror #8 is usually portrayed as the most heroic member of the jury. He'she is devoted to justice and is right away sympathetic toward the 19-year-old defendant. He/she spends the rest of the play urging the others to practice patience and to contemplate the details of the case. He/she thinks that they owe it to the defendant to at least talk about the verdict for a while.

Juror #9 is described in the stage notes as a "mild gentle old [person]...defeated by life and...waiting to die." Despite this bleak description, he/she is the first to agree with Juror #8, deciding that there is not enough evidence to sentence the young man to death and becomes more and more sure of themself as the play proceeds. During Act One, Juror #9 is the first to openly recognize Juror #10's racist attitude, stating that, "What this man/woman says is very dangerous."

This young person is nervous about expressing his/her opinion, especially in front of the elder members of the group. In Act One, his/her allure makes others believe that he/she is the one who changed their mind during the secret vote. But, it wasn't him/her; he/she didn't dare go against the rest of the group yet. However, it is also his/her experience from the slums where he/she grew up, just like the defendant, that will later help other jurors form an opinion of "not guilty."

As a refugee from Europe, Juror #11 has witnessed great injustices. That is why he/she is intent on administering justice as a jury member. He/she sometimes feels self-conscious about his/her foreign accent, but overcomes his/her shyness and is willing to take on a more active part in the decision-making process. He/she conveys a deep appreciation for democracy and America's legal system.

He/she is the timidest person of the group. He/she is easily persuaded by the opinions of others and cannot explain the roots of his/her convictions. In the very beginning, he/she goes along with the general opinion, but soon Juror #8 wins his/her sympathy and he/she begins contributing more, despite his/her shyness. He/she is in the group of the first six jurors to vote "not guilty."

Described as an "honest but dull-witted [person]," Juror #6 is a house painter by trade. He/she is slow to see the good in others but eventually agrees with Juror #8. He/she defies the adversity and pursues the facts, in search of a more complete and objective picture. He/she is the one who calls for another ballot and is also one of the first six pro-acquittal ones.

A slick, superior, and sometimes obnoxious salesperson, Juror #7 admits during Act One that he/she would have done anything to miss jury duty and is trying to get out of it as fast as possible. He/she represents the many real-life individuals who loathe the idea of being on a jury. He/she is also quick to add his/her piece of mind to the conversation.

He/she is an arrogant and impatient advertising executive. He/she is anxious for the trial to be over so that he/she also can get back to his/her career and his social life. However, after Juror #5 tells the group about his/her knowledge of knife-fights, Juror #12 is the first one to waver in his/her conviction, eventually changing his/her mind to "not guilty."

Non-confrontational, Juror #1 serves as the foreman of the jury. He/she is serious about his/her authoritative role and wants to be as fair as possible. Despite being described as "not overly bright," he/she helps calm down the tensions and moves the conversation onward with professional urgency. Heshe sides with the "guilty" side until, just like Juror #12, he/she changes his/her mind after learning about the details of knife-fighting from Juror #5.

The most abhorrent member of the group, Juror #10 is openly bitter and prejudiced. He/she is quick to stand up and physically approach Juror #8. During Act Three, he/she unleashes his/her bigotry to the others in a speech that disturbs the rest of the jury. Most of the jurors, disgusted by #10's racism, turn their backs on him/her.

A logical, well-spoken stock-broker, Juror #4 urges his/her fellow jurors to avoid emotional arguments and engage in rational discussion. Heshe does not change his/her vote until a witness's testimony is discredited (due to the witness's poor vision).

In many ways, heshe is the antagonist to the constantly calm Juror #8. He/she is immediately vocal about the supposed simplicity of the case and the obvious guilt of the defendant. He/she is quick to lose his/her temper and is often infuriated when Juror #8 and other members disagree with his/her opinions. He/she believes that the defendant is absolutely guilty until the very end of the play. During Act Three, Juror #3's emotional baggage is revealed.