Post 2: Royal Juror 8

I've never seen a murder case in person, but I have seen one on TV shows like CSI and Law and Order. Still, that's not enough to relate to the 19 year old in 12 Angry men as he stands in trial, after being accused of stabbing his own father. The votes must be all guilty or all not guilty to reach a verdict through the jury. Eleven votes were ready to send him 6 feet under, but juror 8 saved his life by voting not guilty. About halfway into the play I realized the relation to "Oedipus the King". The connect that I see is between the the fact that both these men had their lives in other peoples hands and were saved. Oedipus was left to die, but two people came along and claimed him as their own. In "12 Angry Men" the boy was saved from death by juror 8 because if the juror didn't vote not guilty he was going to be facing death. The juror felt almost compassionate towards the boy as he says ".Look, this boy's been kicked around all his life. You know - living in a slum, his mother dead since he was nine." and finishes with "He had a pretty terrible sixteen years. I think maybe we owe him a few words. That's all." He obviously had to feel some sort of pity or compassion toward this boy to help him out this much even though he didn't even really know the boy, just like the royal couple that saved Oedipus. Now my question is would you have enough courage to be juror 8? Do you think there are any more connections between the two stories?