In Trump Trial, Jury Selection Is Part Politics | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 05. 2024
- The jury selection process is still underway in former President Donald Trump's Manhattan criminal trial. In order to get on the jury, Manhattanites responded to a questionnaire with 42 questions ranging from whether they belong to QAnon or Antifa to what podcasts they listen to. The attorneys on both sides scrutinized their social media posts, asked them about their opinions of Trump, and had the opportunity to ask they be removed from consideration. This is all with the goal of impaneling an unbiased jury. It’s one of the most important parts of the process and also gets at the heart of a lot of what we talk about on the 538 Politics podcast. Based on a person’s own biography and demography, how do they feel about the former president and his criminal prosecution? In this installment of the podcast, Galen speaks with law professors Jessica Roth and Valerie Hans about the challenges of jury selection and what lack of bias we can expect from jurors in such a unique trial.
Website: fivethirtyeight.com/
Merch: fivethirtyeight.com/store
Twitter: / fivethirtyeight
Facebook: / fivethirtyeight
Podcast: itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/f...
I have been on 6 jury panels to decision, and my experience is that jurors take their responsibility to be fair and impartial very seriously. I have seen jurors with contradictory personal experience vote against their biases based on the evidence provided. Don't underestimate the capacity of the jury that is finally empaneled to render a verdict based on the evidence. Even if they have to hold their noses to do it.
It's surprising but I actually know people who are so disconnected from politics that they really can be impartial. They don't have a clue what's happening. Not that those people are particularly "with it", they simply excel at not paying attention to what's going on outside their own heads.
6:34 it isn’t just a matter of expediency to boot a prospective juror without further questions. Trumps’s defense made the point that they need to know more details for a proper appeal against the venue, and that they need to understand further why people cannot be fair and impartial. The judge is booting people because he doesn’t want the defense to be able to make that case on appeal. He does not want Trump to be able to create statistics about the jury to present to a higher court about the inherent bias is the jury. It is not a coincidence, and it is not for expediency.
Both these guests are awesome, I'm with you Galen, I hope they're back to provide further comment as the trial progresses.
I think it would have to have been hard for anyone interviewed not to just answer that they couldn't be fair. The idea of taking 6 months out of your life for something like this would definitely not be attractive to many. An easy out would be tempting.
I can’t believe they publicized so many details about the jurors. Don’t they realize how easy it is to data mine social media to pinpoint who these individuals are?
It strikes me as a good sign that about 50% of the potential jurors struck themselves for potential bias. NYC is strongly anti Trump, so any crowd of New Yorkers will likely contain a lot of people who dislike him already. If those people judge that they themselves should be off the panel, that seems like it makes the trial more fair. Hopefully one would see a similar percentage of self disqualifications in a Trump stronghold as well, but for people who had a existing positive attitude that they couldn't set aside.
They won't.
Huge fan!
What are the laws regarding the book deals they'll make after the trial?
Writing a book about their experience would be First Amendments protected speech, I believe.
You know, I’m fairly politically engaged (Exhibit A: I’m commenting on this podcast). But I have friends on both sides of the political divide. I understand the appeal of Trump. I understand those who fear him. There are things I think he’s been right about. There are things he did that were wrong. I have my own opinions about his temperament and his actions. I also understand that that needs to be set aside for the purposes of this trial.
Do I have unconscious biases that would influence my judgment? Probably. But it’s hard for me to see how anyone wouldn’t.
You ask: "do you think this is the best system we have?"
I think you should ask: "is this system anything like its stated goals?" Because if it is, then we can forgive it being imperfect, but if it's not, then it cannot be allowed to stand.
Considering its predilection for finding guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" even in cases that result in later exonerations, no, I don't believe this justice system is up to its own stated standards.
Yeah, this defendant is probably guilty. (Although of the three criminal cases against him, this is the one where I'm by far the least confident in saying that.) But this is not a system with the credibility to prove it, and once you start to question the system, I think that should be taken seriously.
Part?
NO BUS'S FROM TEXAS
The court sat a full jury so fast, considering the circumstances! It's a full send to begin this falsified records trial now.
Never TRUST anyone that turns off COMMENTS.
Stop posting about Trump. No one cares
What does that say about the GOP candidates who got clobbered in the Primaries by Trump. Heck he didn't even show up for the debates ! So no one care's about Trump ? Interesting. Guess I'll just skip this election since Biden will go 50-0 🤪😂🤣😂