Trump on Trial: The Jurors

Jury selection has concluded in The People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump. After a long voir dire, six jurors have been selected: three men and three women.

Here’s the brief summary, per media pool reports of the prospective jurors.

Juror #1: Because he was selected first, he’ll serve as the jury foreman. He lives in West Harlem but is originally from Ireland. He works in sales and previously worked as a waiter, and has attended some college. He is married. His spouse is in school and they have no children. In his spare time he enjoys doing anything outdoorsy. He gets his news from the New York Times, the Daily Mail, and some Fox News and MSNBC. (Identified as B400.)

Juror #2: A Native New Yorker who has lived on the Upper East Side for the past 3 years. She has a Masters in nursing and has been an oncology nurse at a large hospital for 15 years. She is not married and has no children. She lives with her fiancé, who works in finance. She enjoys spending time with her family and friends and taking her dog to the park. She gets her news from the New York Times, CNN, Google, and has a Facebook account.

Juror #2 stated “I don’t really have” an opinion on President Trump. She stated “he will be treated as anyone else can be treated and no one is above the law.” She further stated she didn’t have an opinion on Trump before he walked into the courtroom: “I am here for my civic duty. I’m here to listen to the facts.” She said she was there to do her “civil duty.” (Identified as B280.)

Juror #3: He’s likely in his early 30s. He is originally from Oregon and works as a corporate lawyer. He’s Asian. He gets his news from the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and Google. He is aware of Trump’s other criminal cases but is not “super familiar with the other charges.” (Identified as B381.)

Juror #4: He said he found Trump to be “fascinating and mysterious.” Commenting on Trump, Juror #4 stated: “He walks into a room and he sets people off one way or another. I find that really interesting. Really, this one guy can do all of this. Wow, that’s what I think.” (Identified as B89.)

Juror #5: Juror #5 is a black woman in her 20s. She said she isn’t a “political person,” though her friends have strong opinions on Trump (likely negative). She stated she tries to avoid political conversations and doesn’t really care for the news. She does appreciate Trump’s candor: “President Trump speaks his mind and I’d rather that than someone who’s in office who you don’t know what they’re thinking.” She was unaware that Trump faces charges in other criminal cases. (Identified as B374.)

Juror #6: She is a software engineer likely in her 20s. She says she has no strong feelings about President Trump either way, and said “I will be fair and impartial.” She is unmarried, has no kids, and lives with three roommates in Chelsea. She gets her news from the New York Times, Google, Facebook, and TikTok. (Identified as B297.)

All in all, this jury isn’t bad. Manhattan voting demographics put the odds of a Trump voter being on the jury at roughly 1/6. The jurors aren’t overtly political, a couple of them might lean conservative or even be Trump voters. One even described Trump as “fascinating.”

That’s assuming they’re telling the truth. Jurors in politically-charged cases are notorious for hiding their beliefs for the sole purpose of getting on the jury. As we discussed last week, it happened to Roger Stone – his forewoman was a vocally anti-Trump on social media. She deceived the court about that fact and helped lead the effort to convict Stone.

It’s tough to tell what jurors really believe, and whether they’re actually being truthful. Already during jury selection, we saw a number of jurors who failed to disclose their political biases. After Trump’s team received the jurors’ names, they did a quick social media search. One juror, after stating she “didn’t remember” any anti-Trump posts on Facebook, admitted to posting a photo that says: “Trump invites Thai boys to the White House, Thai boys request to return to cage.” Another juror, after failing to recall any anti-Trump sentiments, conceded that he posted on social media a desire that “Donald Trump be locked up.” Without the research of Trump’s team, these potential jurors – these liars – could have been seated.

That’s not to say that there aren’t concerns. Here’s a couple of them:

• Juror #2 lives on the Upper East Side – one of the more affluent neighborhoods in New York City. Politically, it’s a Democrat stronghold. Her social circle is likely liberal.

• Juror #5, while she says she has not much interest in politics, will be mindful that her friends “have strong opinions on Trump.” She’ll feel the pressure to not want to disappoint her friends. What could happen if she doesn’t vote to convict? Ostracization.

It’s probably safe to say that there won’t be an acquittal. Not a guarantee, but those are the unfortunate odds. Trump’s best bet is for a hung jury, for 1 or 2 jurors to resist the pressure to go along with others and vote guilty. Is there a juror, or are there multiple jurors, with the courage to stand alone? We’ll find out.