Trump gripes he can't reject 'unlimited' jurors in New York hush money trial
Trump gripes he can't reject 'unlimited' jurors in New York hush money trial
Donald Trump is accused of falsifying business records involving the payment of hush money to porn star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election.
Donnie's complaints
- Complained about not having a jury
- Complained about having a jury
- Complained about jury selection being too boring
- Complained about falling asleep and being called Sleepy Don.
- Complained he can't see Baron's graduation
- Complained at a Bodega about Bodegas being the epicenter of violence and crime
- Complained about not having unlimited STRIKERS
- Complained about gag order
- Complained about gag order being enforced
- Complained about Jimmy Kimmel hurting his feelings at the Oscar's, which was 38 days ago.
Wah wah wah. Fucking crybaby. How about not breaking the fucking law asshole?
Haha. He's still complaining about Kimmel?
That moron doesn't even realize his complaints cause more people to tune into Kimmel to see Kimmel make fun of him every night.
And I hope Kimmel brings this up tonight.
As per his own words, he's a whiner cause he'll do it till it wins. Unsure how well that works in criminal court though. I'm hoping we get to find out the court's limits sooner than later
He whines the likes the world has never seen. So much whining. I can't stand it all this whining.
There's a bit of usefulness in whining. I "whine" at work all the time, but it's about useful shit. Nothing seems to happen until I complain about something lol
If you can't do the mild inconvenience, don't do the crime.
Complained the looseys cost too much.
He’s just so tired now, why do they keep making him run for president?
It's his retirement plan
“I thought STRIKES were supposed to be ‘unlimited’ when we were picking our jury?” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.
State law, a law that's been around for over a hundred years, limits it to 10 strikes.
That's what he gets for thinking again.
Trump always complains when he has to follow the rules. Doesn't matter what the rule is, he always wants to be the exception.
It probably comes from the decades of experience he has in not having to follow the rules.
And he's always been a lying manipulative piece of shit too.
Exemplifying that here - he actually does get unlimited strikes if there's a legal reason that juror shouldn't be there (e.g. if they say, "I'm not going to consider the evidence, I've already made up my mind.") He's only limited to 10 strikes without having a legal basis for them, but his followers are going to see Trump's whining and walk away with the impression that his lawyers are forced to spend those 10 strikes on "I've already made up my mind" jurors.
I'm not familiar with New York jury procedure, but I vaguely recall reading that -- not specific to New York -- typically there are unlimited "for cause" removals, and a finite number of "not for cause". Like, you can object to someone who isn't going to actually do a sane job as a juror.
googles
Yeah.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_for_cause
Strike for cause (also referred to as challenge for cause or removal for cause) is a method of eliminating potential members from a jury panel in the United States.
During the jury selection process, after voir dire, opposing attorneys may request removal of any juror who does not appear capable of rendering a fair and impartial verdict, in either determining guilt or innocence and/or a suitable punishment.[1] An example would be a potential juror in a murder case, where the sentencing options include the death penalty and a lesser sentence (such as life without parole), who states that they "would sentence a defendant to death if found guilty"; such a statement may indicate the person's unwillingness to fairly consider a life without parole sentence.
Unlike a peremptory challenge (the number of which are limited by the court during voir dire, and unless a Batson challenge is raised the challenge is automatically granted) there is no limit to the number of strikes for cause that attorneys on either side of a case can be granted. However, also unlike a peremptory challenge, a strike for cause must state a specific reason (in the example above, the reason would be the juror's bias against a non-death penalty sentence) and be granted by the trial judge; often both attorneys and sometimes the judge will question the juror being challenged.
If one attorney moves to strike a juror for cause but the judge rejects the motion, the attorney may still use a peremptory challenge (if they have any remaining) to strike the juror, and on appeal may raise a claim that the motion should have been granted but, because it was not, the attorney had to either use a peremptory challenge or seat a biased juror.
You couldn't pay me enough to be a juror for that trial. Sure, just paint a target on my back for this cult leader who's backed by half the government!
I'd happily do it. I'm not a us citizen, though.
And I'm grateful for the people who are willing to do such a thankless task!
No, only you have unlimited strikes when it comes to the law. You threaten another person 483 more times, and we might fine you $1000.
If you threaten the family members of a federal judge a few dozen more times we will slowly start to count down from 5.
I want to say the punishment fits his mental age but how do I reconcile that with the fact that he has dementia? Can toddlers have dementia? Mentally he is a superposition of tot and extremely old.
I was pretty chuffed about that $1000 ask, but it turns out that that's the maximum fine allowed for contempt of court in a criminal trial in New York.
Beyond that, there's either exclusion from the courtroom (and no judge wants to exclude a defendant from the courtroom) or detention up to thirty days.
Let's do the detention one, please.
Oh, this isn't The Onion, this is real news.
TBF I bet the prosecution feels the same way...the juror strike system is designed to make compromises.
"Man, if I didn't have to follow all these rules, I would be winning right now!"
But he can only make deals, not compromises.
To be fair, getting an impartial jury in this case is a lot harder than it would be normally.
No idea why you got downvoted. Nearly everyone will know who he is, since he was the damn President of the country. Nearly everyone will know a lot of stuff about him, since he never fucking shuts up on social media. He has a large percentage of the country who loves him and a larger percentage of people who absolutely hate him. Finally, the case and jury selection is in New York, where he has been in the news for 40 years.
People seem to think that a prior opinion about the dependent automatically means that a potential juror cannot be impartial. All that is required is that the juror can render a verdict based solely on the evidence presented at trial. Plenty of people with strong opinions about Trump himself can still be impartial jurors.
Yup. And those 10 strikes are for exactly that. If you can’t prove a juror will be biased but suspect they will be, then you can use one of your 10 strikes to exclude them. But you have an unlimited amount of “for cause” strikes, where the juror has admitted that they wouldn’t be able to stay impartial.
I'm not sure that's true. Even a person with a great deal of integrity and respect for the law is going to be biased subconsciously to some extent by the knowledge that this case may change the outcome of a particularly important presidential election. A person whose respect for the law is less than absolute may even consider affecting the outcome of the election to be a moral obligation.
I agree. Trump has done everything possible to spread his propaganda and poison the jury pool.
That’s why they’re not allowed to ask nix people for being biased.
Everyone already has their opinions. The best they can do is look for people that aren’t dogmatic.
Is it reasonable to think that if his lawyers get even one maga nut on the jury, they'd have to re-try the case?
On the plus side this is New York, the city that knows him best. And they fucking hate him.
Florida can keep him
The parts of my family that are Trump supporters are all from NYC. I imagine they never have actually met Trump though. I imagine actually meeting him would cure them.
It's up to the government to decide whether or not they re-try a case if there is a hung jury. It's my understanding that most of the time, they do not re-try the case because of the time and effort involved with no guarantee that the outcome would be any different. So usually a hung jury is a victory for the defense.
I'm not a lawyer, that's just my layman's understanding from the legal stuff I've seen and read.
I expect in this case the prosecution would consider it worth the time and expense, but
Hah, get fucked you feckless moron.
I just like that, for the past couple of days, he’s had to sit there and listen to people offer their unfiltered opinions about him as they were entered into the public record. Honestly, I was kinda hoping it’d go on for another day or two so he’d have a rage stroke.
"No one can judge me!" - Donald Trump literally
You know how many times he's asked his lawyers if they could? At least a dozen.
Cant expect any different from the rotten orange pussy
Of course that's what he wants to do. Reject all of them and then have the judge declare a mistrial when they can't seat a full jury.
In bird culture we would call this "being a whiny little bitch"
To be fair, it's a lot harder to get unbiased jurors for this case than it normally would be.
Trump mostly caused those issues though. He talks about these things constantly. Then argues the trial cannot start because there's too much attention.
Further, there is a pre selection. The judge rejected loads of people beforehand.
Trump mostly caused those issues though. He talks about these things constantly. Then argues the trial cannot start because there's too much attention.
Hmm. That might actually be a valid legal strategy. I'm not sure that the fact that the defendant caused the problem actually takes away their protections.
Honestly, Trump is so globally visible that I don't know how you'd remedy that, though. A change of venue isn't going to change anything.