MSNBC : Juror 2, the oncology nurse, has been excused from duty. She had concerns about her identity becoming public

[kpete]

MSNBC
: Juror 2, the oncology nurse, has been excused from duty.

She had concerns about her identity becoming public and said friends and family have already inquired about whether she's a juror. The juror added that, given these outside influences, she was concerned about her ability to be fair and impartial.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

UPDATE:
“Two jurors have been dismissed in Donald Trump’s hush money trial,” the AP reports.

“One was excused after expressing doubt about her ability to be fair and impartial. The other was dismissed after prosecutors raised questions about the accuracy of his answers during selection process.”

“The dismissals on Thursday bring down to five the number of jurors seated so far.”
https://politicalwire.com/2024/04/18/two-trump-jurors-dismissed/

[Walleye]

1. How long before trump comments on this, and how come he's not in jail

[Rebl2]

36. He should have

to watch from another room on a tv with one of his lawyers.

[Irish_Dem]

2. Trump intimidation is working very well.

He belongs in jail.

[underpants]

4. The media needs to stop giving out details on jurors

It can’t be that hard for people to figure out who is who.

[brooklynite]

7. Everything the media is reporting is a matter of public record.

[onenote]

15. Which is why the judge is ordering some information not to be included in the public record

[underpants]

42. That doesn't mean it has to be broadcast

[Celerity]

67. Good luck with the media showing any self-restraint.

[onenote]

88. The media in this instance isn't just Fox News. Multiple entities have beenreporting the proceedings in detail.

The judge has done the correct thing by announcing that certain information about the prospective witnesses will no longer be part of the public record.

[Irish_Dem]

12. Yes I was concerned yesterday when identifying info was being released.

And once the Trump attorneys know the names of the jury members it will
be public in a few minutes. They have no shame.

[onenote]

17. Trump's attorneys know the names of the prospective jurors and those that are chosen.

So far, no names have been made public.

[Irish_Dem]

18. The jury doesn't trust the courts or Trump attorneys.

They are going to be nervous.

100% certain Trump will find a way to make the names public.

[AllyCat]

38. Take his Phucking phone and

Lock him up. He had his phone in court this morning according to cnn.

[Elessar Zappa]

59. Whoever's going to be on the jury

will have my admiration. They’re going to need to be brave individuals, given that Trump or (more likely) his associates are going to leak their names and drag them through the mud,

[Irish_Dem]

64. Yes same thoughts here, very brave people.

Of course any Trump fan jury members are not brave,
they know they are safe from the flying monkeys.

[Think. Again.]

23. You're right, "so far", and I doubt...

...trump's attorneys will make the mistake of announcing those names publicly, but I strongly suspect they'll leak them to various people.

[Irish_Dem]

45. Trump's attorneys do what Trump tells them to do.

The jury member names will be leaked one way or the other.

[Think. Again.]

47. Yup.

[Irish_Dem]

48. None of them seem to care about their law license.

[bluestarone]

107. If they are named public by the lawyers, then what?

Just what would be the consequences? MISTRIAL, DELAY? These assholes won't care. Seems like the judge SHOULD lay out the penalties, THEN use them.

[orangecrush]

71. Mob lawyers gonna mob.

[Irish_Dem]

97. Yes we get to see a pack of mob lawyers in action.

Threatening members of the jury with their goon squad.

Hopefully they will lose their law licenses and soon.

[orangecrush]

99. Very optimistic

Call me a cynic.

[Irish_Dem]

100. There are lawyers losing their licenses.

But you are correct, not many of them who commit crimes for Trump have lost their license.

[Beachnutt]

6. This

?feature=shared

[GP6971]

62. Hello.

[Irish_Dem]

63. First time

I have been accused of being a satanic abuse pedophile.

I must have hit a nerve for that kind of projection.

[orangecrush]

72. Boy that one was gone fast

[niyad]

74. I love our cleanup crew!!!

[orangecrush]

75. At least our system works

[Irish_Dem]

93. Yes it does.

[Irish_Dem]

92. I hope they were wearing masks when they fumigated that one.

[niyad]

112. Pretty sure that was one of our resident trolls, in its latest incarnation.

I think our cleanup crew has a special collection just for them.

[Irish_Dem]

115. Yes they work really hard and quite quickly to keep the site clean.

They do an amazing job.

Yes I think there is a troll reincarnation list.

[niyad]

68. Hello again. What flavour pizza today?

[ShazzieB]

69. WHAT.

[bdamomma]

119. In regards

to selecting jurors is it practice publicizing their job titles????

[DET]

3. Another Juror

Defense is questioning whether juror #4 misrepresented his answers to the jury questionnaire. Older Puerto Rican guy who runs an IT business. I’m surprised that the young Irish guy in sales hasn’t been outed.

[onenote]

89. It was the prosecution that first raised concerns about jurors #4.

[EleanorR]

5. I think the press was wildly irresponsible

They shouldn't have published the details they did. I realize it's all part of the public record, but still, what were they thinking?

[Think. Again.]

13. I doubt that the fact...

...juror #1 has a specific accent that could help id them is part of the public record.

[Irish_Dem]

16. Very easy to figure out.

This is a world famous trial. Everyone knows about it.

Irish man, Irish brogue, works in sales.
Lives in Manhattan.

Is not working this week and has taken time off.
People talk, friends and family can narrow it down quickly.

[Think. Again.]

22. Yup, if the media had only given the public information...

...from the court records, it wouldn't be so easy to ID individuals.

[EleanorR]

41. Agreed

[wnylib]

85. The media need a gag order, but both Trump and the media

would challenge it on 1st amendment basis.

[onenote]

90. And they would win that challenge. Which is why Merchan will not issue such an order.

In 1984 the Supreme Court held, unanimously, that there is a presumption under the First Amendment that court proceedings, including the voir dire, be open public proceedings. As Justice Marshall explained in his concurring opinion, "the constitutional rights of the public and press to access to all aspects of criminal trials are not diminished in cases in which "deeply personal matters" are likely to be elicited in voir dire proceedings." Moreover, according to Justice Marshall, while the presumption of openness can be overcome, "prior to issuing a closure order, a trial court should be obliged to show that the order in question constitutes the least restrictive means available for protecting compelling state interests. In those cases where a closure order is imposed, the constitutionally preferable method for reconciling the First Amendment interests of the public and the press with the legitimate privacy interests of jurors and the interests of defendants in fair trials is to redact transcripts in such a way as to preserve the anonymity of jurors while disclosing the substance of their responses.... Only in the most extraordinary circumstances can the substance of a juror's response to questioning at voir dire be permanently excluded from the salutary scrutiny of the public and the press."

Merchan is a good judge who knows the law and has taken the step outlined by Marshall: redacting transcripts and keeping certain information out of the public record.

[bluestarone]

8. No way they will keep Identification of jurors private

The MSM wakes up everyday with the MAIN reason, to find out WHO the jurors are. WTF?

[onenote]

91. So far they have kept names private. If identifying them was their goal, why haven't they done so?

[bluestarone]

96. We'll see!

I'm thinking eventually they WILL.

[jalan48]

9. This is how Trump wins and our system of justice appears incapable of stopping him.

[bucolic_frolic]

10. Are they being too specific on occupation?

Works in health care

Is a nurse

Is an oncology nurse

[onenote]

19. The judge has ordered that such information no longer be included in public record.

[Irish_Dem]

24. The judge needs to be quicker on the uptake or someone is going to get killed.

[Rebl2]

37. Should have only said she worked

in healthcare or is a nurse. No reason to specify what type of nurse.

[Think. Again.]

49. No real reason to specify anything about them.

[Rebl2]

57. I agree

[NowsTheTime]

105. Absoluitely no reason to disclose their occupation, area where they live, none of it!

[FloridaBlues]

82. Yes

[honest.abe]

11. I pity these jurors.

It will be hell for next several weeks.

[brooklynite]

20. If you don't read social media (which the Judge will instruct them not to do) you won't know about the RW ranting.

[Think. Again.]

25. I doubt they're concerned about internet ranting...

...but they would be foolish not to take the credible threat of violence by rightwingers against them and their families seriously.

[honest.abe]

29. You really think they wont be reading news and social media in their free time??

[brooklynite]

40. Not if they're following the Judge's orders.

I0’ve served on a criminal Jury. They’re pretty emphatic on that point,

[honest.abe]

70. Assuming your are correct and they strictly follow judge's orders.. they will still hear about it.

Wife or mother or some relative will call. "Its all over the news and social media, the RW lunatics are trying to identify and intimidate jurors."

[Irish_Dem]

14. Trump's goal is to get everyone to resign.

So he can hand pick the jury.

[mucifer]

21. How do you disappear for 6 weeks and your friends and family not suspect

you are on the jury??

[Think. Again.]

28. Well, there are quite a few juries happening at the same time in NYC.

[mucifer]

30. Probably not so many that you could NEVER discuss after the trial ends. Consider the

jurors would be gone the exact days of the trump trial.

It's very tricky.

[former9thward]

109. Not juries that last as long as this one.

[Think. Again.]

111. It's NYC.

[former9thward]

114. So?

How many six-week criminal trials are going on in NYC right now? I would bet none. A defendant has to be rich to afford a 6-week trial and how many rich defendants are on trial for crimes in NYC right now?

[Think. Again.]

116. You're assuming quite a bit...

...but long trials are not uncommon in major cities.

[former9thward]

117. I don't live in a bubble.

I do criminal defense in a major city and you are wrong.

[Think. Again.]

118. I guess I'll have to take your word for that.

[cilla4progress]

26. Fascism is alive and well!

Fear of violent repercussions is working.

[ismnotwasm]

27. Yeah, she would have been outed in no time

Not good.

[NoMoreRepugs]

31. Fear of ones safety is a powerful motivator.

[Tommy Carcetti]

32. "Female in health care industry". That's all that needs to be said.

If there's anything at issue on social media, describe it in general terms, not verbatim.

Anything too specific runs the risk of narrowing down the guess work.

[thesquanderer]

44. Yes, not verbatim! Far too easy to identify anyone merely from a tweet or FB post.

Any exact verbiage should be withheld from the public record, because it can be just as identifiable as giving someone's name.

[Think. Again.]

50. Why even that much?

[Disaffected]

33. I don't understand why occupation has anything to do

with jury selection, let alone placing it in the public record. Or, gender for that matter.

[Ponietz]

34. Sequestration is in order

“Social” media is anything but social — a plague on humanity.

[Mr.WeRP]

35. The Judge will need to fully gag Trump and keep media out of court room

[SergeStorms]

54. NYC is full of Trump spies.

Murdoch owns 2 New York City newspapers; the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post.

Those two media sources have hundreds of paid informers throughout New York.
It'll be impossible to keep the jurors names secret. Impossible.

This, of course, plays right into Trump's gameplan.

But if Donnie is so innocent of the charges in this "witch hunt", wouldn't he try to get this trial going quickly, present all of his exculpatory evidence that will clear his "good name", and get back on the golf course campaign trail ASAP?

[PortTack]

55. Absolutely!

[onenote]

83. The media isn't going to be kept out of the courtroom.

First, I assume you aren't advocating that there be no press reporting on the trial itself.

Second, to the extent you are advocating that the press be barred from the jury selection process, in 1984 the Supreme Court held, unanimously, that there is a presumption under the First Amendment that court proceedings, including the voir dire, be open public proceedings. As Justice Marshall explained in his concurring opinion, "the constitutional rights of the public and press to access to all aspects of criminal trials are not diminished in cases in which "deeply personal matters" are likely to be elicited in voir dire proceedings." Moreover, according to Justice Marshall, while the presumption of openness can be overcome, "prior to issuing a closure order, a trial court should be obliged to show that the order in question constitutes the least restrictive means available for protecting compelling state interests. In those cases where a closure order is imposed, the constitutionally preferable method for reconciling the First Amendment interests of the public and the press with the legitimate privacy interests of jurors and the interests of defendants in fair trials is to redact transcripts in such a way as to preserve the anonymity of jurors while disclosing the substance of their responses.... Only in the most extraordinary circumstances can the substance of a juror's response to questioning at voir dire be permanently excluded from the salutary scrutiny of the public and the press."

[Mr.WeRP]

108. Sorry, should have been clearer...

I mean the jury selection could be done without the press present.

[bdamomma]

121. And not

giving that orange pus job a fine to pay instead of putting him in jail.

[Fullduplexxx]

39. All evil needs is for good people to be afraid

She's a real profile in courage

[Old Crank]

43. Sounds like the press is complicit

However her friends and family should have kept their mouths shut also.

[twodogsbarking]

46. Intimidation. Trump inflicts it on everyone. Thus the reaction and the inaction.

[Doodley]

51. Is this really the best our justice system can do to prosecute that SOAB?

[padah513]

52. Can you blame her? They're calling her the oncology nurse. Why not just juror number 2?

[Talitha]

53. I wish they would not reveal Jurors' gender, approx age, occupation, nationality, etc.

Just a simple announcement at the end of jury selection as to the gender balance of Jurors and Alternates would suffice.

I also wish that Dump not be allowed to see their faces or find out their names. IIRC Dump's lawyer got the list of names and Dump was allowed to see it? I don't trust either of them.

Yeah, I know there's probably some sort of rule that allows all these things to occur, but c'mon...

[Abigail_Adams]

56. My letter to [e-mail]

Dear Sir or Madam:

It is distressing to learn that MSNBC, along with other news outlets, is providing detailed demographic information about jurors or potential jurors in the Trump hush money trial. This is delaying the trial and undermining the whole idea of not identifying the jurors because everyone knows what Trump and/or his minions will do to them.

I exhort you to stop providing any demographic information about the jurors--not occupation, not nationality, not sex, not the borough where they live, NOTHING. It's your responsibility to protect their identities fully, not give them away.

Sincerely,

Abigail_Adams

[bdamomma]

122. Thank you

for posting the e mail. I will e mail them my thoughts too.

[Karma13612]

58. So basically

We have unique information about the jurors.

In this case “Juror #2, the Oncology Nurse”.

May as well have been her name.

So, how long would it have taken when work colleagues realized their coworker, an oncology nurse is suddenly away on a “leave of absence”? Put two and two together. If she shared with her friends she had been called to appear, then they can easily surmise she was paneled.

We should have ZERO information about these jurors! ZERO! Especially if any of them had shared with friends or family (other than a spouse or child who they live with) that they had gotten a notice about jury duty! Put two and two together and the person is outed!

Friends and family talk, so it’s hard to keep a juror’s status quiet.

Gosh this is so frustrating.

[former9thward]

110. Even if the media did not report it their co-workers would know.

Someone is suddenly gone for 6 weeks? No explanation? Anyone can figure it out.

[Karma13612]

125. That's why I suggested

That if someone was called for jury duty, in NYC, and they wanted to keep it quiet, they only tell their house mates (roommate, spouse, children) and tell them to keep it quiet. An employed person would need to tell the boss to get time off, and deal with the wage reimbursement thing.

Loose lips sink ships. I covered the absence issue in another post. Sick relative, etc.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

61. Fox News helped expose this juror

Link to tweet

[karynnj]

84. Wow that is a huge amount of information.

[onenote]

94. Yes they did. But they weren't the first nor the only media entity to do so.

Which makes a claim of jury tampering against them pretty hard to sustain.

[moniss]

65. Remember the weasel only needs

one juror to end up hanging the trial.

[orangecrush]

76. The prosecution are not idiots

Isn't gonna happen.

[moniss]

78. I have no doubt whatsoever that

at least one person is going to try and lie and get on the jury. Will they be sniffed out? Who knows?

[onenote]

95. So what is your solution? Not have a jury trial?

[moniss]

101. Hardly. I'm just pointing out

that we need to keep in mind that one juror alone can throw the whole thing no matter how damning the evidence.

[onenote]

102. As is the case in every criminal trial. I thought that was universally understood.

[moniss]

104. This is not your typical

"every trial" and people need to realize that someone may go to great lengths to get on the jury for purposes of voting not guilty. As it is I see the media basically ignoring this aspect and devoting their focus to whether jurors are found who can be "fair" to the Orange Ruski. Look at how much media time has been given to him nodding off for example. About the most meaningless thing to spend time discussing but it was the lead item for much of the media reporting.

I see tons of comments from many sources on the shallowest of things regarding the trial. People generally need to WTFU and realize that fretting over this or that detail of what Cohen or Stormy might say for example is far less a problem than staying laser focused on the actual task at hand with the jurors. But as usual the media will spend most of their time prattling away filling air time with endlessly repeated memes echoed by "analyst" after "analyst" through segment after segment.

They could actually take some time and educate their listeners a bit about the pitfalls and arguments against requiring unanimous verdicts in lower level felony non-violent cases. Especially involving the wealthy and famous. They could educate their listeners about the insanity of an argument the majority on the SC used in the Ramos case regarding the issue of unanimity. But that would take people with half a f'ng brain to realize the ramifications of Ramos and the stunning insanity of using the very thing the court decried as needing to be rejected while at the same time engaging in that very conduct itself to support it's decision.

But that's alright. No need for increased knowledge. Not when we can fill the air time with what the Orange Ruski is wearing, whether he smiles or frowns, whether he nods off, where are the kids, what does the retired farm couple in the diner in Des Moines think, how many former prosecutors/lawyers/judges we can round up to give us endless speculation about what testimony somebody might give and then hypothetically what impact that hypothetical testimony might hypothetically have on the prosecution/defense/jury and certainly last but not least we'll be treated to the spectacle of countless reporters chasing down Lindsey Graham and MTG for their comments about the latest "development".

[EleanorR]

66. Employment status, past and present, to be redacted

Should have done this from the start.

Merchan agrees with the defense that employment info is necessary for attorneys. But he says that it has become a problem. Merchan directs that questions 3A and 3D will be redacted from the record, and press is prohibited from reporting the answers. (via Tyler McBrien, Lawfare)

— Joshua J. Friedman (@joshuajfriedman.com) 2024-04-18T13:41:35.181Z

[rubbersole]

73. Time to publish the names of the assholes who get caught threatening jurors/court personnel.

[MustLoveBeagles]

77. I'm in favor of this

[Bluethroughu]

79. So criminals can intimidate judges, juries, and victims

Into our inability to hold them accoutable.

How's the institution of Justice working?

Lock this maniac up.

[karynnj]

80. While i agree with others that the amount of information was too much, in this case,

it might be that those messages and calls made her feel that she was going to be fully identified. Trump's tweets and the violence of some of his supporters could well make her uneasy.

Consider her friends and family KNOW she is an oncology nurse and a resident of Manhattan. She might be the only person they know with both of those characteristics. I would send a message to a friend or sister like this - expecting a response "not me". I don't know how many women oncology nurses there are in Manhattan, but even given it is likely in the hundreds, simply saying she works in Healthcare or even more specifically as a nurse would be far better. The less detailed info provides as much relevant information.

[MOMFUDSKI]

81. This will continue until judge stops releasing

names to the attorneys.

[onenote]

87. None of the names have been made public.

Not sure what you think will keep happening. The information about the juror's was stated in open court and reported by the media -- and not just Fox News. For example, Inner City News has been posting minute by minute descriptions of the proceedings, including the information publicly disclosed about the jurors. In fact the information about the juror that wanted to be excused was published by Inner City News a day before Watters posted the same information. The judge has done the correct -- and constitutionally permissible -- thing by declaring that the identifying information will no longer be part of the public record. But Watters, Inner City News, and any of the probably countless sources that repeated that information are going to be charged with witness tampering.

[kacekwl]

86. This is complete bullshiit.

This should not be public information. They are never going to get a jury with the media giving their information to anyone so they can be subject to threats, intimidation etc. This trial already a joke along with thinking any justice will come trumps way. Bullshit.

[onenote]

98. So the trial is "a joke"? Should the prosecution just dismiss the charges and call it a day?

[kacekwl]

123. No, no

The prosecution should demand REAL consequences for the defense team and the defendant himself for jury intimidation. According to many here it is public information and revealing names and private information for those on the jury. If true then that certainly is a joke if trump is ever to be brought to justice.

[onenote]

124. Has there been an instance where the name of a juror has been disclosed to the public?

If and when that happens, the judge should -- and I believe will -- come down hard on those responsible. And if and when anyone communicates with a juror with the intent to influence the outcome of the proceeding -- the applicable standard under New York law, the DA should bring charges.

[kacekwl]

126. There is no if.

Games are already being played and even if names are not released people can and will figure it out. The threat of being exposed is enough to intimidate potential jury members as has already happened.

[Chainfire]

103. There is some danger being associated, in any way, in a mob trial.

Deifne it any way you wish, but Trump is the head of the largest mob the country has ever known. Some people will be willing to accept that danger, of jury service, others won't. I can't blame them.

The judge will sit a jury, Trump will be tried, that is all we can expect. In a nation with 40% of the population in Trump's camp, it will be very difficult to get a conviction, but it the only system available. My reptilain side would prefer a night and fog solution for Trump, but my other, and better, half knows that that is not who we are.

Lets try to be patient, take our small pleasures from Trump's discomfort and be ready to move on whatever happens.

[Trueblue1968]

106. Get rid of Fox host Waters. Get rid of him In A Permanent Way !!!!!

[ecstatic]

113. The media has to be more careful. Stop sharing their damn jobs and business types! nt

[bdamomma]

120. For OJ's trial

were the juror occupations publicized???? I thought they usually say how many females and males ?