'The jurors: who is on the Trump trial jury?'

[Joinfortmill]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/18/jurors-trump-hush-money-trial-jury

'Seven men and five women have been chosen to sit on the jury in the ex-president’s hush-money trial. Here’s what we know'

'Juror No 1
Juror No 1, a man, works in sales and previously worked as a waiter, and has some college education. He is married with no children, and says he gets news from a range of outlets such as the New York Times, the Daily Mail, Fox News and MSNBC.

Juror No 2
Juror No 2 is a married man who works in investment banking. He has an MBA in finance. He described himself as someone who “reads basically everything” and said that while he doesn’t hold any strong beliefs or opinions, he does follow the news and sees Trump’s Truth Social posts via Twitter. He told the court that he had not read any of Trump’s books, but had seen quotes from The Art of the Deal.

Juror No 3
Juror No 3 is a man who appeared to be in his late 20s or early 30s, who is originally from the west coast. He works in corporate law and said that he gets his news from the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and Google.

Juror No 4
Juror No 4 is a man who is originally from the west coast. He is a security engineer with some college education, and is married with children. He said he was not on social media, and once served on a criminal jury in the past though could not remember the verdict. When asked if he had any concerns about returning a guilty verdict, he said no.

Juror No 5
Juror No 5 is a young woman who said that she had friends with strong opinions on Trump, but that she was not a political person and avoided the news. She said she did appreciate Trump’s candor, and that he “speaks his mind, and I’d rather that than someone who’s in office who you don’t know what they’re thinking”.

Juror No 6
Juror No 6 is a woman who works in tech. She told the court that she had no strong feelings about Trump, and pledged to be fair and impartial. She is unmarried with no children, and gets her news from the New York Times, Google, Facebook and TikTok.

Juror No 7
Juror No 7 is a man in his late middle age who works as a civil litigator. He is married with children and has never served on a jury. He gets his news from a variety of outlets including the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post and the Washington Post, and from podcasts.

Juror No 8
Juror No 8 is a retired wealth manager who is married with children. Asked if he had any strong opinions about Trump, he paused for a moment before answering yes. When the judge followed up to ask him if he could be fair and impartial, he said he could.

Juror No 9
Juror No 9 is a woman who told the court she believed she could fully follow the judge’s instructions, but was not well versed in legal proceedings. She lives alone, does not follow the news closely and is originally from New Jersey.

Juror No 10
Juror No 10 is a man who works in e-commerce and said he did not really check the news, but listens to podcasts on behavioral psychology. He is originally from Ohio.

Juror No 11
Juror No 11 is a woman who said she did not follow the news, but did watch late-night comedy shows. She is originally from California, and said she had never rallied for or against Trump. One of her close friends was convicted of financial fraud, she said.

Juror No 12
Juror No 12 is a woman who works as a physical therapist. She lived in a few states before coming to New York, reads major news outlets and listens to podcasts about sports and faith.'

My Words: This jury is not a slam-dunk for the prosecution.

[claudette]

1. Why is so much

information about jurors made public? It’s dangerous. Didn’t Juror 2 ask to be removed because people recognized her and contacted her?

[GreenWave]

5. Agreed. They should find dark $ donors and help democracy, not destroy it.

[jimfields33]

7. Juror number 4 is the worst.

He doesn’t remember the verdict of the case he sat on? Come on. It’s not like you sit on a hundred trials in a life time. It was one case. I’m sorry but I find that hard to believe. I’ve been called a few time and got one one jury and remember it well ten years later.

[bucolic_frolic]

2. I never would have passed. I get my news from Democratic Underground

That would be like a pinko-commie plot to Trump's lawyers.

[IcyPeas]

3. LOL we at Democratic Underground know more news

than most, I'd say. We're too well informed.

[snowybirdie]

4. Why why why?

There is no reason what so ever to partially "out" people simply doing their civic duty. If identified, they face death threats and fear for their families. The Guardian is a rag and we can expect something like this, but to repeat it elsewhere is unconscionable.

[Redleg]

6. Agreed- that seems to be way too much info

[patricia92243]

8. It is definately not a slam dunk for the prosecution. Having a prostitute and

a convicted felon testify is not good.