Please subscribe to Fox News to access this content
You’ve reached the maximum number of articles. To continue reading, please log in or create a free account.
By entering your email address and pressing “Continue”, you agree to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, including the Financial Incentive Notice.
Please enter a valid email address.
The judge overseeing former President Trump’s New York criminal trial is under intense scrutiny for jeopardizing the credibility of his own jury when he wrote to the defense team about comments posted on the court’s public Facebook page that suggested one juror had discussed a guilty verdict with family members before the trial ended.
The comment was posted by a user who described himself as a “professional shitposter,” and some have questioned why Marchan reported the matter to Trump’s lawyers rather than investigating it more thoroughly.
In a letter Friday, Judge Juan Marchan told Trump’s legal team and Manhattan prosecutors: “Today, this court has become aware of comments posted on the Unified Court System’s public Facebook page and wishes to advise you of these.”
“In the comments, user ‘Michael Anderson’ said: ‘My cousin is on the jury and he says Trump will be guilty! Thanks for all your efforts!'” The same user commented on another post, “Thank you for all your efforts.” [sic] Blame the MAGA fanatics! My cousin is on the jury in Trump’s criminal case and she says they’re going to find him guilty tomorrow.”
NY v. Trump: Judge reveals Facebook posts suggesting jurors discussed guilty verdict before trial ended
After someone pointed out on Facebook that it was illegal for jurors to discuss the case before the verdict, a user calling himself “Michael Anderson” posted that he and his cousin “got married.”
Fox News has not verified the allegations in the comments or the identities of the users who posted them, but legal expert and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley said the likelihood that the allegations are genuine is “relatively low.”
In his letter Friday, Judge Juan Marchan pointed to comments posted on the court’s public Facebook page suggesting one of the jurors had discussed convicting Trump with family members before the trial concluded. (Associated Press)
“As I said when this story first broke, I remain skeptical, so I was surprised that the court acted in this way before even the most basic investigation of this post had been conducted,” Turley, the constitutional lawyer, told Fox News Digital. “All of our sites, from Facebook to blogs, are constantly inundated with trolls, bots and posters who are clearly losing their minds.”
“The likelihood that such posts are genuine juror testimony is relatively low in this day and age. The key to the Dead Sea Scrolls is more likely to be found in the graffiti left in the courthouse. That’s not to say that it shouldn’t be investigated, but the mere appearance of such posts is not reason for the court to call in all hands,” he added.
Jurors were under strict orders from the judge not to discuss the case with anyone while the trial was ongoing.
According to Marchan’s letter, the comments came in response to “UCS’s routine notice of oral argument in the Fourth Appellate Division, unrelated to this case, posted on May 29, 2024.”
There is little public information on the Facebook profile for “Michael Anderson,” but the user describes himself as a “Transable & professional s— poster.”
A Trump campaign official told Fox News Digital on Friday night that the campaign is “investigating this matter.”
Other legal experts also spoke out about the importance of maintaining the fairness of jury trials.
“These are the things that lead to mistrials,” William Trackman, an attorney with the Mountain States Legal Foundation, told Fox News Digital. “This doesn’t have to be about politics. It can be about justice.”
If the allegations against the jurors are true, it would call into question “the entire verdict,” Trachman added.
Trump lawyers ask for gag order lifted on store owner after trial, before presidential debate
“Anytime a juror is talking about what they’re going to do in the future, especially ‘I’m going to do this tomorrow,’ that’s a very significant issue for a juror to consider,” he added. “If that’s true, it really casts doubt on the entire verdict.”
Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahamani told Fox News Digital on Friday that the jury’s verdict is “sacrosanct,” but that a mistrial could result if “outside influence is introduced.”
“Jury deliberations are sacrosanct, and even if a juror got the facts or the law wrong, the defense generally cannot use jury arguments as grounds for a new trial or appeal, except when outside influences are brought into the jury deliberation room,” he said.
If an invalidation ruling is issued, Mr. Trump’s legal team would have to prove “both improper outside influence and bias.”
“But the burden of a retrial is high,” he said. “The defense must prove both improper outside influence and prejudice. If there was prejudice, the outcome might have been different.”
“A side note On social media That’s not enough to warrant a new trial.”
The comments were posted the day before Trump was to be sentenced on all 34 counts of first-degree falsifying business records. Trump had pleaded not guilty to all charges. (Reuters/Jane Rosenberg)
William Jacobson, a clinical professor at Cornell Law School and founder of the Equal Protection Project, told Fox News Digital that it’s important to “take this seriously, but not get ahead of the facts.”
“Given how important this is to the presidential election, I think it’s very likely that if a juror had done what has been alleged, the judge would have no choice but to overturn the verdict,” he said.
“Once the court learned of this online content, it notified the parties accordingly,” state OCA spokesman Al Baker said Friday.
Click here to get the FOX News app
The comments were posted the day before Trump was to be sentenced on all 34 counts of first-degree falsifying business records. Trump had pleaded not guilty to all charges.
The six-week trial stemmed from charges brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.
Fox News’ Brooke Singman contributed to this report.
Merchan called out for warning about ‘troll’ comment suggesting Trump jury was compromised
Please subscribe to Fox News to access this content
You’ve reached the maximum number of articles. To continue reading, please log in or create a free account.
Please enter a valid email address.
The judge overseeing former President Trump’s New York criminal trial is under intense scrutiny for jeopardizing the credibility of his own jury when he wrote to the defense team about comments posted on the court’s public Facebook page that suggested one juror had discussed a guilty verdict with family members before the trial ended.
The comment was posted by a user who described himself as a “professional shitposter,” and some have questioned why Marchan reported the matter to Trump’s lawyers rather than investigating it more thoroughly.
In a letter Friday, Judge Juan Marchan told Trump’s legal team and Manhattan prosecutors: “Today, this court has become aware of comments posted on the Unified Court System’s public Facebook page and wishes to advise you of these.”
“In the comments, user ‘Michael Anderson’ said: ‘My cousin is on the jury and he says Trump will be guilty! Thanks for all your efforts!'” The same user commented on another post, “Thank you for all your efforts.” [sic] Blame the MAGA fanatics! My cousin is on the jury in Trump’s criminal case and she says they’re going to find him guilty tomorrow.”
NY v. Trump: Judge reveals Facebook posts suggesting jurors discussed guilty verdict before trial ended
After someone pointed out on Facebook that it was illegal for jurors to discuss the case before the verdict, a user calling himself “Michael Anderson” posted that he and his cousin “got married.”
Fox News has not verified the allegations in the comments or the identities of the users who posted them, but legal expert and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley said the likelihood that the allegations are genuine is “relatively low.”
In his letter Friday, Judge Juan Marchan pointed to comments posted on the court’s public Facebook page suggesting one of the jurors had discussed convicting Trump with family members before the trial concluded. (Associated Press)
“As I said when this story first broke, I remain skeptical, so I was surprised that the court acted in this way before even the most basic investigation of this post had been conducted,” Turley, the constitutional lawyer, told Fox News Digital. “All of our sites, from Facebook to blogs, are constantly inundated with trolls, bots and posters who are clearly losing their minds.”
“The likelihood that such posts are genuine juror testimony is relatively low in this day and age. The key to the Dead Sea Scrolls is more likely to be found in the graffiti left in the courthouse. That’s not to say that it shouldn’t be investigated, but the mere appearance of such posts is not reason for the court to call in all hands,” he added.
Jurors were under strict orders from the judge not to discuss the case with anyone while the trial was ongoing.
According to Marchan’s letter, the comments came in response to “UCS’s routine notice of oral argument in the Fourth Appellate Division, unrelated to this case, posted on May 29, 2024.”
There is little public information on the Facebook profile for “Michael Anderson,” but the user describes himself as a “Transable & professional s— poster.”
A Trump campaign official told Fox News Digital on Friday night that the campaign is “investigating this matter.”
Other legal experts also spoke out about the importance of maintaining the fairness of jury trials.
“These are the things that lead to mistrials,” William Trackman, an attorney with the Mountain States Legal Foundation, told Fox News Digital. “This doesn’t have to be about politics. It can be about justice.”
If the allegations against the jurors are true, it would call into question “the entire verdict,” Trachman added.
Trump lawyers ask for gag order lifted on store owner after trial, before presidential debate
“Anytime a juror is talking about what they’re going to do in the future, especially ‘I’m going to do this tomorrow,’ that’s a very significant issue for a juror to consider,” he added. “If that’s true, it really casts doubt on the entire verdict.”
Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahamani told Fox News Digital on Friday that the jury’s verdict is “sacrosanct,” but that a mistrial could result if “outside influence is introduced.”
“Jury deliberations are sacrosanct, and even if a juror got the facts or the law wrong, the defense generally cannot use jury arguments as grounds for a new trial or appeal, except when outside influences are brought into the jury deliberation room,” he said.
If an invalidation ruling is issued, Mr. Trump’s legal team would have to prove “both improper outside influence and bias.”
“But the burden of a retrial is high,” he said. “The defense must prove both improper outside influence and prejudice. If there was prejudice, the outcome might have been different.”
“A side note On social media That’s not enough to warrant a new trial.”
The comments were posted the day before Trump was to be sentenced on all 34 counts of first-degree falsifying business records. Trump had pleaded not guilty to all charges. (Reuters/Jane Rosenberg)
William Jacobson, a clinical professor at Cornell Law School and founder of the Equal Protection Project, told Fox News Digital that it’s important to “take this seriously, but not get ahead of the facts.”
“Given how important this is to the presidential election, I think it’s very likely that if a juror had done what has been alleged, the judge would have no choice but to overturn the verdict,” he said.
“Once the court learned of this online content, it notified the parties accordingly,” state OCA spokesman Al Baker said Friday.
Click here to get the FOX News app
The comments were posted the day before Trump was to be sentenced on all 34 counts of first-degree falsifying business records. Trump had pleaded not guilty to all charges.
The six-week trial stemmed from charges brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.
Fox News’ Brooke Singman contributed to this report.
Related News
Senate approves housing bill supported by Trump, but outcome in House is unclear
Trump: ‘We are monitoring’ Iranian sleeper cells in the US
Critics push back on Newsom’s extreme climate policies following rising gas prices under Trump