Final answer:
Juror #3 from the play '12 Angry Men' is the answer to the question, showcasing how personal biases can affect a juror's decision-making and the importance of impartiality in the jury system.
Step-by-step explanation:
The juror described in the question is from the play 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose. This juror is known as Juror #3. He is characterized by his stubbornness and emotional baggage, particularly stemming from a strained relationship with his own son.
Throughout the play, Juror #3 is one of the most antagonistic jurors, openly expressing a personal bias based on his issues with his son, which impacts his decision-making.
It is only at the play's climax, after being confronted with his own prejudices and seeing the impact of his emotional responses, that he finally acquiesces and agrees to vote 'not guilty,' becoming the last juror to change his vote.
Juror #3, in his actions and words, is a demonstration of how personal experiences and biases can influence an individual's perspectives, especially in high-stakes situations such as a jury's deliberations.
His eventual change of heart is critical to the unanimous decision required to reach a verdict in the American jury system.