662
I think that the mafia uses similar tactics as a part of their defense strategy when on trial.
Fox News committing stochastic terrorism, again?
No no no. This is just witness tampering and obstruction of justice. Oh, and stochastic terrorism, yes. So, yes.
You guys just don't understand! Any media organization not tampering with the jury pool is just a leftist rag!
Why is there no unbiased news?!?! All I want is an unbiased news source that covers the news conservatives care about - like where I can find these jurors to threaten!
If only there were some kind of fairness doctrine, that forced news organisations to make an honest attempt to report both sides.
Holy shit did Fox News just intimidate a juror in a high profile trial?
Edit - just got to this bit
Other outlets including NBC News, CNN, CBS News, and ABC News also publicized details about the juror, including additional identifying information.
What the fuck? How is this even in the public domain?
I walked by a tv at work today on CNN.
They were literally discussing the profession and reading habits of a juror.
Big ass question mark greyed out female, and a host making the biggest deal over the fact a juror reads NYT.
It's fucking scary I'd drop the fuck out too. These piranhas are gonna oust any information about you for views. The news is beyond a joke, completely agree with you, how this is public domain and tolerated is more telling to our status as a nation.
This is going to be the delay he wants if the US media goes full OJ here. Which they likely will - some to benefit Trump, all for the views. Juror protection be damned.
Yeah it's pretty crazy even MSNBC was covering some of their details yesterday, but tried to scale it back today. The reality is this info is being put out on the wires to all press agencies. The real one to blame it the judge for not locking down the procedures or how and what the lawyers can ask.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Fuck the courts for letting public have access to that info.
Exactly, knowing ahead of time all of this should have been sealed by default. Anytime the defendant/case is this high profile the whole thing should be sealed off to contain this circus.
It doesn't matter. Trump will literally call them out himself. And nothing will happen when he does.
The system is broken. It is not breaking, it is fucking BROKEN.
It doesn't sound like it was released.
It seems like stuff from jury selection questions that some court audience members noted. The court already blocked recording.
They remove the audience, but that's a double-edged sword since no public transparency even for reporters would fuel all of the conspiracy crap and there would be no information available to debunk. This is Trumps wet dream. Being able to spout pure fantasy with nobody to rebut.
Best solution would be for the judge to clamp down to say that he will charge anyone who leaks any jury info with contempt.
The judge may have been anticipating this media circus. Now there's a clear reason to remove the audience, so it's safer.
Trump was going to spout lies and nonsense no matter what, and the people who believe him now will believe him no matter what. My money says the judge just wanted an excuse--and we'll see a complete lockdown with no audience from now on.
Well, they have now made it where the employment and past employment questions stricken from the record and have instructed all media not to report the answers to those portions of the questionnaire. That's what she felt identified her.
But I agree in spirit.
Why is the press even in the room or present in any way when that information is being discussed
Because generally these things wouldn't be a problem. Except that trump and his followers have a history of grasping at every straw, defaming anyone they can, and getting people hurt for no good reason.
load more comments
(1 replies)
If the courts don't immediately arrest and charge this person with juror intimidation/tampering then it's all over. The fascist mob will figure out who the jurors are and threaten their families en masse because there will be no consequences.
Conservatives will do more than threaten. They are all bloodthirsty pieces of shit.
load more comments
(1 replies)
At what point does this become jury tampering? Veiled threats should never be taken lightly, especially since Fox is an entertainment organization and not news, as they've argued in court previously.
How the fuck is this legal?
Because the goal is to declare this a mistrial. Break as many rules as possible, get thrown in contempt, etc. Because those will be MUCH smaller penalties/fines and will drag out the clock until after the election.
Whereas grinning and bearing it lets the courts actually try to get some semblance of justice.
Using terrorism to protect a criminal (again). The Republican Party cannot possibly be redeemed.
If they get one or two of these Jurors KILLED they're going to get a VERY STERN letter from the Judge!
All according to plan.
I've read that Jury Tampering has a very low bar in New York. Pretty sure Watters just crossed it.
So 90% of a jury of his peers fucking hate him, and will conclude he did the crime. Oh my God, sounds like he's going to jail. You really need to keep churning the group until you find the select few who think he's innocent of a crime? The obviousness says something.
And, no, haters, this is not what jury selection looks like. 10 years as a trial lawyer, and never ONCE were any of my selections broadcast on TV. This shit should illegal.
I'm just a middle aged white guy and I know this isn't normal because it's never happened in my life unless the news is talking about jury tampering that already happened.
Watters has alleged without evidence that "liberal activists" are lying to get on the jury, a claim that Trump himself has repeated on Truth Social, potentially violating a gag order.
It's like they saw Trump, Giuliani and Alex Jones all get absolutely fucked in court for defamation, contemplated their own settlement with Dominion and the 2.7 billion dollar lawsuit pending from Smartmatic, and said to themselves "now seems like a good time to endanger innocent people by spewing inflammatory bullshit."
Not that I expect them to learn a lesson if they aren't bankrupted or actually sent to prison.
load more comments
(1 replies)
This Watters dude is so smug. I hate his guts. His existence bothers me.
load more comments
(3 replies)
It's like a totally lawless country already, the laws exist but don't matter/aren't enforced, your police are all too busy hiding their own crimes to actually do any real police work (and they don't know how any more anyway), and the news, mortally terrified by their own financial situation, increasingly cross lines that'd have been suicide even ten years ago.
I wish you fucks would get serious. Some of us Canadians are talking about burning down your white house again. (And yes, it was us - we don't draw a hard line between us and the empire that delivered us here, on account of having ended the relationship like grownups and not with the stupid, arrogant violence that still infects your society today)
I can't help but contemplate that jurors are concerned about being publicly identified in a case involving a former president. Typically, you would only see that happen in a case involving violent organized crime.
Violent organized crime
Yeah, like Jan 6th
Does this kind of jury tampering increase the risk of a mistrial?
I wonder why they don't just clear the courtroom of reporters during juror selection and let them back in for the actual trial.
I would be fucking THRILLED if the judge puts a universal gag order on publication of ANY juror details.
load more comments
(3 replies)
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024
662 points (99.7% liked)
politics
19118 readers
3322 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS