Steve Duffy, from Trial Behavior Consulting, tells The Independent that stealth jurors “fully have an opinion … but [are] trying to get on the jury”.
“It’s important to President Trump that he get a fair shake,” lead defence attorney Todd Blanche told jurors on Tuesday.
So, generally, that means looking at people’s social media, and you can also look at any publicly available information, it’s fair game,” Mr Duffy says.
“The faster the jury selection process works the harder it is to do that comprehensively,” Mr Duffy says.
But he only needs one.” On Wednesday night, one day after seven jurors were sworn in, Fox News personality Jesse Watters broadcast identifying details about one of the seated jurors, Juror No 2.
Mr Trump has violated a protective order in the case at least seven more times since the trial began, according to prosecutors.
Mr Duffy tells The Independent that it’s clear that the attorneys in Mr Trump’s trial did their “due diligence” on the jurors.
“For sure,” Mr Duffy says when asked if a stealth juror may be able to derail the trial.
To consider the evidence and render a verdict in the hush money trial of the former president Donald Trump, a full jury has been sworn in.
A week-long jury selection process resulted in the appointment of twelve jurors and six alternates.
In the trial that began in 2016, Mr. Trump is accused of ordering his former fixer and current prosecution witness, Michael Cohen, to pay adult actress Stormy Daniels to keep quiet about her 2006 affair claim. Daniels claims that Mr. Trump had an affair with her.
One of the main goals for both sides in the hush money trial of former President Donald Trump was to identify potential “stealth jurors”—those who pose as impartial but conceal their prejudices in order to be selected for a jury and perhaps ruin a case.
It is expected of jurors to be unbiased. Many potential jurors were eliminated from the proceedings for no other reason than they believed they could not sit in judgment of the former president without being impartial.
The Independent is informed by Steve Duffy of Trial Behavior Consulting that stealth jurors “fully have an opinion… but [are] trying to get on the jury.”.
“I’m sure there are potential jurors on both sides who genuinely want to serve on the jury but are holding back because they have strong opinions about him or her,” Mr. Duffy asserts during the jury selection process. Background research is the key to identifying those people, and both parties are definitely conducting it. “.
Throughout the trial’s first week, jurors were asked a number of questions by Manhattan prosecutors. These include: even though they are aware that the man seated at the defense table in front of them is “a former president and a current candidate for that office,” can they still uphold the rules of fairness and impartiality and adhere to the facts, the evidence, and the judge’s instructions?
On April 16, Assistant District Attorney Joshua Steinglass said to a group of prospective jurors, “We don’t expect you to be living under a rock for the last eight years, or the last 30 years.”.
But, he told them, pay attention to the evidence.
However, the majority of the questions from Mr. Trump’s lawyers were limited to, “What do you think of him?”.
Lead defense lawyer Todd Blanche told jurors on Tuesday that President Trump cares about receiving a fair trial.
It’s simple to say, ‘Yes, I will be fair and impartial,’ after reading something off a piece of paper. He remarked, “I want to test that out a little bit. Everyone here is aware that they all have varying perspectives on President Trump and that each of you knows him in a unique way. “.
He declared that nothing would “offend” him and that there were no wrong answers.
Instead of confronting a disgruntled group of New Yorkers, Mr. Blanche was met with promise after promise to handle Mr. Trump like any other criminal defendant and to keep their personal opinions of him apart from the case at hand.
“People are aware of his identity,” Mr. Steinglass stated on February 15 at a pretrial conference. They’re going to feel a certain way about things. They may find him appealing or repulsive. They can still be impartial jurors as long as it does not impair their capacity to evaluate the evidence impartially. “.
A potential stealth juror, according to Mr. Duffy, would not be “volunteering information, or honestly answering because they want to be on the jury” in order to either convict or overturn a conviction.
Although it was challenging given that President Joe Biden received 84.5% of the vote in Manhattan in 2020, the prosecution sought to eliminate any Trump supporters, while the defense attempted to eliminate anyone who might have a left-leaning viewpoint.
The parties investigate the jurors’ backgrounds. Accordingly, that entails viewing people’s social media accounts. You are also free to view any publicly accessible material, according to Mr. Duffy. And to be really honest, these days, everyone involved in a legal proceeding uses juries because, if they don’t, they will be at a significant competitive disadvantage. So, if people have made particularly strong statements on social media, they will be able to determine who is Republican and who is Democrat. “.
Lawyers on both sides of a case examine publicly accessible information on political donations and criminal convictions in addition to social media posts.
According to Mr. Duffy, “it is harder to do that comprehensively the faster the jury selection process works.”. “You could never do that in a case like this. I’ve had jury selection in a federal court take 30 minutes from start to finish—we essentially didn’t know anything about the candidates. “.
According to Mr. Duffy, the prosecution and defense placed a great deal of emphasis on eliminating potential stealth jurors, but the prosecution’s focus was especially significant because a unanimous decision is required to prevent a mistrial. The Trump team only needs one juror to vote against conviction.
He predicts a mistrial if there is even one witness who simply states, “I don’t care… I will never vote to convict.”. Finding the elusive juror, whether they support or oppose Trump, is therefore a top concern for both parties. “.
It’s great that you won’t be convicted in Trump’s world if he manages to get one of those jurors who will never, ever vote to convict. So, it is crucial for the prosecution to find and prosecute anyone who acts in that way, he continues.
In comparison to the South Florida region where Mr. Trump’s case involving classified documents is being handled, the jury pool in New York is more biased against him during the trial, according to Mr. Duffy, “because in Manhattan, Trump’s supporters stick out like a sore thumb.”.
Throughout the jury selection process, Mr. Duffy remarks, “The prosecution certainly has [fewer] problems than Trump does,” but he also says that Mr. Trump “doesn’t need to get acquitted.”. All he needs is a mistrial.
The defendant’s best friend is frequently delay, according to Mr. Duffy. The proportion of jurors who openly support Trump is expected to be extremely low. He just requires one, though. “.
The Fox News host Jesse Watters revealed specifics about Juror No. 2, who is seated, on Wednesday night, one day after the other seven jurors were sworn in.
He asserted, without providing any supporting evidence, that “undercover liberal activists” were attempting to be jurors. After citing Mr. Watters’ remarks on Truth Social, Mr. Trump elevated his false conspiracy theory that the cases are “rigged” against him by speculating that Manhattan residents called to jury duty are lying to the judge, prosecutors, and defense attorneys in order to be seated in the case.
Juror No. 2 returned to court the following morning to inform the judge that elements of her identity that had been made public in the media had caused friends, coworkers, and family members to inquire about her role.
“I don’t think I can be impartial and fair in the courtroom right now and not allow outside influences,” she remarked.
Shortly afterward, Manhattan prosecutors informed the judge about Mr. Trump’s “unsettling” Truth Social post that featured a quote from Mr. Watters. This post was made on the former president’s social media account, and it happened just a day after the judge had cautioned him against intimidating jurors.
Christopher Conroy, the assistant district attorney, told the judge on Thursday that the situation was absurd and that it needed to end.
Prosecutors claim that since the start of the trial, Mr. Trump has broken the protective order in this case at least seven more times.
On April 23, the judge will decide whether to hold Mr. Trump in contempt, fine him for allegedly breaking the gag order, order the removal of his posts, and issue a warning that he might go to jail for any more infractions.
It’s obvious that the lawyers representing Mr. Trump during his trial performed their “due diligence” on the jurors, Mr. Duffy tells The Independent.
It’s evident that both juries ask members straight questions concerning their posts on social media. Directly addressing juries with that is unusual, he continues, but it’s a result of Donald Trump’s pervasive public persona.
If a stealth juror could sabotage the trial, Mr. Duffy responds, “Definitely.”. “One of the jurors that was removed did not. The prosecution was hinting at the possibility that he might serve on the jury. “.
The consultant points out that the potential juror omitted to reveal that he had destroyed political signs and that his wife had participated in criminal corruption proceedings.
“A lawyer is going to be suspicious of any non-disclosure of that nature,” he continues. It is easier to evade detection the further off the grid you are. “.
The problem of stealth juries, according to Mr. Duffy, “cuts both ways,” since some people may attempt to join the jury with the intention of convicting someone who is “hell-bent” on doing so, and others may decline to do so regardless of what the trial may reveal.
He goes on to say that those vying for “celebrity” might “overlap” with those hoping to be jurors in order to influence the result. People may want to do that because it excites them or almost titillates them to be involved, especially in this day and age. “.
But there’s also the other problem.
One juror was dismissed on the dot. was someone who, fearing for their personal safety, is terrified to be involved in this,” Mr. Duffy writes on Thursday.
