NEWSLINE PAPER,- Three months ago, a jury of nine in New York heard Donald Trump, who was acting in a most unusually reserved manner. Unlike his typical theatricality, in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case, his complaints and conversations with the judge took place away from the jury's perspective. The hurried and prepared testimony by Trump lasted about three minutes.
The spectacle reached its zenith the next day when Trump abruptly left the courtroom during Carroll's attorney's closing statement. To make sure the jurors weren't unaware of Trump's exit, Judge Lewis Kaplan promptly noted it.
The result was startling: the jury quickly found Trump guilty of defaming Carroll and awarded him $83.3 million. Part of this staggering amount was attributed by the columnist's legal team to Trump's protest.
Thinking back on Trump's sudden exit, Carroll's lawyer Roberta Kaplan told CNN's Anderson Cooper that it probably badly damaged Trump's case. She underlined how their disagreement was mostly about Trump's contempt for the law and regulations, which he feels don't apply to him.
Step forward to present day, and Trump is up against another trial in New York, with far larger stakes. From among hundreds of New Yorkers, twelve jurors and six alternates will be chosen in a painstaking procedure that probably won't end in the first week of the trial.
A former president who has dominated American politics for nearly ten years and been a mainstay of New York's tabloids for decades makes choosing an impartial jury a significant task.
The problem that faces the legal teams of Trump and the prosecution was succinctly put by Steve Tuholski, a partner at Delphi Litigation Strategies who specializes in witness training and jury selection. In a polarized environment, particularly in New York where views on Trump are sharply divided, it is difficult to find impartial jurors.
The hush money case is the first of maybe four criminal trials Trump may have to go through. Presumably the last trial before the 2024 election, this one is quite important. Trump's performance may influence public and juror opinion, which would affect his prospects of winning reelection.
Judge Juan Merchan's courtroom will hold about 100 potential jurors at a time as jury selection gets underway. Merchan released a questionnaire that gives both legal teams information on possible jurors' political ties and inclinations.
Trump's lawyers want to find jurors who are sympathetic and who can make their own decisions, which is essential to avoiding a unanimous decision. Conversely, the prosecution is looking for jurors who have a history of making wise choices and are skilled at determining credibility.
Trump had asked to have the trial moved to a different county, but the court turned him down because of his worries about biassed jurors. While Democrats dominate the political scene in Manhattan, prospective jurors won't be turned down based only on their opinions on Trump.
There might be Trump fans on the jury, as seen by a few possible jurors who stated views consistent with Trump's story during the Carroll defamation trial. Still, Merchan stresses the need of guaranteeing a fair trial and forbids making public remarks regarding jurors.
Having chosen Trump, the jury will keep a close eye on him during the trial, scrutinizing his responses to the prosecution's charges and the testimony of witnesses. Trump's actions might have a big impact on how the jury views him; any outbursts or disruptions might backfire.
Trump's actions could influence the jury in this high-stakes trial in either direction. Trump's actions during the proceedings are crucial because, as Tuholski points out, witness demeanor has a significant impact on jurors' judgments.
(NEWSLINEPAPER/EDITOR)