What are the top three examples of prejudice in Twelve Angry Men (three different jurors and one example each)?

Twelve Angry Men is a film, written by Reginald Rose, that demonstrates the effect of prejudice on a jury deliberating on a murder case. The three leading examples of such prejudice come from jurors number 4, 10, and 3.
The earliest and mildest statement of prejudice comes from Juror 4, an intelligent, well-to-do stock-broker.

Slums are breeding grounds for criminals. It's no secret children from slum backgrounds are potentially menaces to society.

As the majority of the jury begins to swing towards a not-guilty verdict, Juror 10 erupts in a diatribe of racial hatred towards minorities

Look, you know how these people lie. It's born in them . . . They don't know what the truth is! . . . This kid on trial here. His type. Well, don't you know about them? There's a danger here. These people are dangerous. They're wild.

He's finally silenced by Juror 4, who is perhaps embarrassed to hear his own earlier prejudice repeated in a much uglier and more irrational manner.
The final, and deepest example of prejudice, based on the defendant's youth, comes from Juror 3, a bellicose and sadistic man, whose brutal discipline had alienated his teen-aged son.

Rotten kids . . . You work your life out!