WaPo: "Could You Judge Trump Impartially?" 12 New Yorkers opine
Of course personally, no Trump defense attorney worth their salt (irony noted) would ever allow me on the jury. On the other hand, I like to think that I may judge Trump harshly, but I'm not prejudiced against him. I do try to be objective. If a lawyer could convince me that his hush money payment was still a legal transaction and that his fiscal monkey business was only a misdemeanor, not a felony, I could see me voting "not guilty" on the felony charges and only "guilty" on the relevant misdemeanors. I feel like I could be objective about those kinds of fine distinctions.
As a teacher, as a supervisor of teenagers who are inclined to rebel against authority, I have to make objective judgment calls all the time about teenagers kicking out their heels against the arbitrary rules and perceived humiliations at the directive of my fellow grown-ups. Sometimes we get it wrong. Sometimes I'm too blunt with a kid who's really just laying his face down, not texting his friends during classwork time. I've learned it's critical to know how (and when) to question my own judgments.
On the other hand, I also am a "fool-me-twice" authority figure. When people show a disregard for the system that protects the rights of all of us, they get no slack. Punishment needs to be swift more than it needs to be sure. People who feel trapped are cats and need to herded with certainty... when they feel trapped, when they feel disinvested from the overall fairness of the system. I think of Sam Adams, that boisterous advocate of oppositional incivility and popular rebellion, who, when he heard about Shays's Rebellion, declared that the people who had the right to rebel against a tyrant had absolutely no right to rebel against a republic--despite the Massachusetts courts clearly acting tyranically against the farmers of central Massachusetts.
Of course for his part, Trump's team is probably banking on getting a sleeper agent in there. A closet Proud Boy or a too-lazy-to-protest fellow traveler from the 3%er crowd or just some bitter middle class resenter of all things foreign who wants to get into that jury and stand up for Bigot #1. As usual, the people who believe in justice are carrying the load of fairness for the slackers who mooch off the system that creates a more equitable system than allowed by a pure free market or a centrally controlled economy. But that's the price of freedom, or as JFK put it, that's where we have to step forward and ask what we can do for our country.
COULD YOU JUDGE TRUMP IMPARTIALLY?
Here is what 12 New Yorkers said
Trump is facing 34 felony charges for allegedly falsifying business records related to a hush money payment to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election, to keep her from accusing Trump of a long-ago affair.
If you’re 18 years old or older, a citizen, live in Manhattan, can communicate in English and do not have a felony conviction, you are, technically, eligible to serve on a jury, according to state officials. Prospective jurors will have to answer a survey and questions from lawyers to determine whether they can judge the evidence fairly.
One prominent jury consultant said the issue is more nuanced than gauging partisanship or voter behavior. “It’s about evaluating how strongly they feel about him and his actions, and their ability to identify their own impressions about him,” says Richard Gabriel, co-author of the book “Jury Selection Strategy and Science.”
The key, he said, is “to have people talk about the strengths of their feelings about Donald Trump.” In other words, jury selection isn’t about finding people without any opinions about the former president, rather it’s finding jurors that are able to put their biases aside.
