Reaching a verdict

Stepping into the role of a character diametrically opposed to your own beliefs is a huge challenge for any actor.

Kevin Dobson, whose performances include roles in the movies “The French Connection” and “Klute,” as well the television series “Kojak” and “Knots Landing,” did just that, leaving his own moral judgments at the door in order to portray bigoted Juror No. 10 in “Twelve Angry Men,” Reginald Rose’s classic drama about 12 jurors in a swelteringly hot and heated New York City deliberation room.

Director Scott Ellis brings this newest incarnation of the story to the Orange County Performing Artscenter next week, and the age-old question of whether the jury has reached a verdict takes some interesting twists and turns along the way.

The life of a teenage boy, accused of killing his abusive father, hangs in the balance as each man struggles with the question of guilt versus innocence in a case that initially appears sure to elicit a unanimous guilty vote.

The attitudes of many of the characters go against all the things Dobson said he’s lived his life according to, but that all of us have some amount of prejudice, whether we choose to acknowledge it or not. In the story, each character is faced with their own reasons for voting, or not voting, a certain way, something all of us can relate to.

“It’s the onion theory. You peel away the layers to get to the core issue,” Dobson said.

“Each juror has a bit of our personality that we identify with, and there’s underlying anguish and angst that’s all under the surface.”

As soon as the 12 men appear on stage, the audience enters the jury room with them, and stays there for 90 minutes, Dobson said. The dialogue is intense, fast-paced and, at times, occurring all at once.

“Live theater is a whole other ball game. Everybody [on stage] is in the same room, and it makes you pay attention. You’re watching the reactions of all the jurors, and you have to follow the bouncing verdict.”

While Dobson doesn’t agree with the views his character espouses, he acknowledges that Juror No. 10 speaks “his truth, his belief,” and Dobson said he knows people like that. The portrayal also affords the actor a chance to emote in a big way.

“I wouldn’t give this up for love or money. The speech at the end — it rips. It’s the greatest monologue of all times, and I’m so fortunate to be spewing.”

Alan Mandell, who portrays Juror No. 11, said his character is the oldest, most experienced, quiet and dignified juror, a man who only speaks when he has something to say.

“There’s something about this older man. He’s an amusing, sympathetic character who delivers some very funny lines,” Mandell said, adding that he’s also the first juror to change his vote from guilty to not guilty.

“He listens to Juror No. 8, believes the man has a point to make and respects his motives as they’re expressed.”

The play is an opportunity for a younger generation to see how the system works, Mandell said.

“It’s a wonderful play, marvelous for young people. Unfortunately, the issues are the same — prejudice and obscuring the truth. The message, though, is be yourself and come to your own decision without being bullied.”

Neil H. Cogan is vice president and the dean of Whittier Law School. Cogan will be part of a panel of legal experts participating in a question-and-answer session after some performances.

Cogan believes the drama spotlights the negative as well as positive reasons for assembling juries as opposed to letting a judge determine the fate of someone who committed a crime.

In jury trials, Cogan said, you rely on the judgment of ordinary citizens who bring their own biases, agendas and personal issues into the courtroom. The other alternative though, Cogan said, having a judge — a professional with expertise — making that decision alone probably isn’t the way to go either.

“I think it’s better to have a group of lay people who don’t do this on a daily basis. People in the work place, in the market, in the malls, people with life experience who are more exposed to daily life.”

That group should comprise a cross section of the community, Cogan said, because the community is what stands as protection for the individual.

Cogan identified with the character of Juror No. 8, the only juror who refuses to enter a guilty vote when the story begins. Juror No. 8’s belief that there may be reasonable doubt, and his desire to discuss the case at length, is the reason for all the anger and hostility that eventually erupts in the jury room.

“He’s resistant to pressure. He asks probing questions to help elicit the underlying biases and beliefs [of his fellow jurors],” Cogan said.

“Throughout, you learn what drives the opinions and choices of each individual juror, which is a great part of the drama.”

IF YOU GO

WHAT: “Twelve Angry Men”

WHEN: Feb. 26 through March 9. Show times are 7:30 p.m. Tuesday through Friday; 2 and 7:30 p.m. Saturday; 1 and 6:30 p.m. Sunday.

WHERE: Orange County Performing Artscenter’s Segerstrom Hall, 600 Town Center drive, Costa Mesa

COST: $15 to $65

INFO: Three post-performance Q-and-A panel discussions will take place Feb. 26, 27, 28 at 9:10 p.m. For information, call (714) 556-2787 or go to www.ocpac.org.

SUE THOENSEN may be reached at (714) 966-4627 or at sue.thoensen@latimes.com.