Judge gets warning Trump jurors are being identified as second gets dismissed
Donald Trump's election interference case over his alleged hush-money scheme lost seated jurors Thursday — with one released because she feared she would be identified.
Minutes after juror number two was dismissed, saying her worries over being named meant she wasn't certain that she could be fair and impartial, a male juror stepped forward to reveal he hadn't disclosed an arrest for tearing down political posters. He too was let go.
Stewart Bishop of Law360 explained, "And then there were five."
Juror number two's reason for dismissal was particularly concerning for experts because, while the judge has ordered steps be taken to keep jury members anonymous, identifying information has been given.
Plus, the jury members don't know they will be kept anonymous.
Read Also: No, Donald Trump, fraud is not protected by the First Amendment
The judge had hoped that the jury, which needs 12 members and six alternates, could be seated by Monday for the start of the trial. That may not happen now. "Another group of 96 potential jurors are now in the courtroom, and Judge [Juan] Merchan is reading some initial instructions," Bishop said Thursday.
"Merchan reads the boilerplate instructions to the second panel, a reminder that something Merchan will *not* mention (unless 'necessary') is that this is an anonymous jury, per Trump's wishes, b/c doing so might be prejudicial," Tyler McBrien of Lawfare reported from the courtroom.
Legal experts Thursday outlined reasons why jurors would be nervous — and mentioned that Trump has been accused of multiples violations of a gag order intended to protect witnesses and jurors from attack. A judge has scheduled a hearing about that for Tuesday.
"He was the chaos president, now he's the chaos defendant," Harry Litman told MSNBC on Thursday morning.
"This is very concerning, as the judge said there's a reason this is an anonymous jury," said Michigan law school professor Barbara McQuade. "There is a desire to protect this jury from threats, intimidation, or even coercion by outside forces. But there has been so much detail reported about these jurors that it's probably not hard to figure out if you know something about them.
"They've been asked not only where they live, but they've been asked who is your current employer and who was your previous employer?"
Juror number two said she was worried after getting messages from family members and friends that suggested they knew she was involved.
"I think one of the things that the judge has said perhaps they ought to do is to not make public the place of employment or prior employment, instead just asking what it is you do for a living," McQuade continued.
"That would be sufficient for these lawyers to decide whether this is an appropriate juror without providing a lot more details publicly."
The judge also admonished the media for providing a physical description of jurors.
Former federal prosecutor Ankush Khardori said that it has nothing to do with the media but with the district attorney's office "for not managing this process more intelligently."
He went on to express concern that it won't stop until the judge does something.
"It gives everyone more ammunition, but the biggest problem is it opens up a whole new avenue of problems for Judge Merchan and the proceedings," Litman explained. "You've had juror consultants fan out to the neighborhoods and find out about them, we're 24 hours or 48 hours since, and one or two identities maybe are already known."
Litman agreed with Ankush, saying none of it would stop without Judge Merchan getting involved.
See the discussion below or at the link here.
Legal experts tell judge he must make identifying jurors stop after a second drops out www.youtube.com