Clare A’Hearn

McLean High School

Heat, hearsay, and human nature. A lone voice for acquittal in the midst of eleven hands voting guilty. In this compelling rendition of "Twelve Angry Jurors" at Duke Ellington School of the Arts, tensions were high in the courtroom as the fragility of the human condition was put on trial.

Written by Reginald Rose and originally known as "Twelve Angry Men," based on the 1954 teleplay, "Twelve Angry Jurors" centers around the case of a nineteen year old who stands accused of murdering his father in the first degree. Twelve jurors of different genders, races, ethnicities, and socioeconomic statuses sit in a locked room tasked with deciding one man's fate. The premise is simple, but the decision the jurors must reach is not.

Standing alone as the singular "not guilty" vote was Santiago Moriarty as Juror 8. Juror 8's adamance about the weight of their decision was underscored by Moriarty's thought-provoking sermons and slammed fists in an outburst of emotions. He balanced these varying emotions through adroit line delivery and consistent composure, presenting contradictory arguments to discover reasonable doubt in the case, a feat that required firmness and silent strength from Moriarty.

Challenging any expression of doubt was Nasir Gosmon-Walker as Juror 3. He maintained confidence in the guilt of the accused despite the realizations of the other members of the jury. Gosmon-Walker proved to be more than the antagonist. He built complexity in the stillness of his portrayed anger, and his rigid posture allowed for an unanticipated eruption and familiarity with violence. Jurors 3 and 8 were set in direct opposition with one another, but Moriarty and Gosmon-Walker utilized such tension to illustrate an engaging portrait of the human condition through lines and through silence.

With a commanding stance and tone, Sky Jabali-Rainey as Juror 4 depicted the logical arguments and unfeeling interpretation of the case. Jabali-Rainey maintained an even temperament and clear voice through the sequences of high emotions from the other jurors. Juror 5, depicted by Demonte Addison, provided an outlook to tenement life essential to the case. In the emotional arc of the character, Addison depicted depth and expertly maneuvered a switch blade knife with sudden movement in order to instill reasonable doubt in the members of the jury.

Juror 11 presented an immigrant's perspective to the case and was portrayed by Aniya Newsome. She sustained incredulous reactions at the absurdity of certain arguments and aptly employed a Ghanaian accent that differentiated her view from the onset of the deliberations.

Nadia Jimaw as Juror 7 and Eric Curry III as Juror 2 added lighthearted feeling to the serious nature of the show. While Jimaw expressed comical annoyance at being kept from attending a Dreamgirls show, Curry's humor centered around his erroneous usage of a timepiece to count the seconds of the jurors' experiments.

The entirety of the ensemble employed subtle cues to indicate the age of the character they were depicting and developed characterization with properly placed eye rolls and genuine smiles. Through deliberate movements and murmurs, the ensemble prevented stagnation even as emotions would linger in seconds of silence.

The technical aspects of the production emphasized the severity of the task at hand. Performing in a smaller theater allowed for an intimate setting with the audience's closeness to the stage providing a more immersive and impactful experience.

The jurors' verdict was final, but the audience was left to ponder the emotions displayed in the courtroom and if justice was truly served at Duke Ellington School of the Arts' admirable production of "Twelve Angry Jurors."

Katie Brusseau

Lake Braddock Secondary School

"Not guilty." Two simple words that transformed in meaning over the two hours that twelve jurors spent in a locked room. What began as one juror's notion of reasonable doubt amidst eleven eager-to-leave fellow jurors became a question of innocence, prejudice, and integrity. This weekend, Duke Ellington School of the Arts brought Twelve Angry Jurors to life.

Based on the familiar classic Twelve Angry Men, a 1957 film by Reginald Rose, the show revolves around a jury of twelve individuals summoned to determine the fate of a young man accused of murder. The play takes place in a single room and consists entirely of dialogue between the jurors as they debate the accused man's innocence. The decision must be unanimous, so they decide to take an initial vote which results in eleven votes in favor of a guilty verdict, and one dissenter.

The first to express "reasonable doubt" is Juror 8, a composed, older man portrayed by Santiago Moriarty. Moriarty gave an extremely compelling performance throughout the show. The character always had intention: from the calm objections at the dismissal of his opinions to his outbursts of anger at the ignorance of others. The balanced emotion Moriarty portrayed demonstrated Juror 8's loyalty to the principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty.' Juror 3, portrayed by Nasir Gosmon-Walker, served as a foil to Juror 8 because he insisted on the accused's guilt. Despite being the clear antagonist in the story, Gosmon-Walker's dynamic voice and potent body language illustrated a complexity not outlined in the dialogue. The unsavory but passionate characterization gave great depth to the character, encouraging sympathy for someone clearly in the wrong.

Though the conflict between Juror 3 and Juror 8 fueled disputes over the verdict, the supporting characters brought new perspectives to the jury room, as did the actors playing them. Sky Jabali-Rainey, playing Juror 4, gave an excellent performance of a rich woman. She displayed a mildly haughty attitude present in every move, word, and reaction. In addition, Nadia Jimaw's brazen and vivacious portrayal of Juror 7 energized the stage with every line.

Twelve Angry Jurors is clearly an ensemble production, and the cast achieved this in the highest regard. They worked together to establish the reality of a 1980s jury room setting; from consistently fanning themselves after describing the heat to flawlessly interrupting each other and giving the dialogue a natural beat. The actors blended wonderfully, painting a cohesive portrait of civilized discord. However, that did not stop them from clearly distinguishing themselves among the other jurors. Destinee Coburn and Demonte Addison showed outstanding specificity in temperament as Jurors 9 and 5, respectively. However, all the actors had perceptible attributes allowing for the opinions and background of the characters to be inferred based on how they carried themselves.

It is performances like Duke Ellington's that have allowed Twelve Angry Jurors to stand the test of time. Their incredible characterization as individuals and as an ensemble created an unforgettable production that brought to light the importance of integrity and humility amongst a group of twelve angry strangers.