The post-trial drama surrounding former President Trump’s criminal case continues to unfold in the liberal stronghold of New York City. Judge Juan Merchan is now under fire for his questionable actions, which have only served to raise doubts about the integrity of the jury’s decision.
In a baffling move, Merchan sent a letter to Trump’s defense team alerting them to a comment made on the New York court’s public Facebook page. The comment, allegedly from a user named “Michael Anderson,” claimed that his cousin was a juror who had already decided to find Trump guilty.
But hold on, folks. Before we jump to any conclusions, let’s take a look at some expert analysis. According to legal guru and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley, the likelihood of this comment being genuine is about as slim as finding the key to the Dead Sea Scrolls in a courthouse bathroom. And we all know how reliable Facebook comments from random users can be.
“The odds that such a posting is a genuine account of a juror in this day and age is relatively small. You would have a higher likelihood of finding the key to the Dead Sea Scrolls on the graffiti left on the courthouse. That does not mean that it should not be investigated, but the mere appearance of such a posting is hardly cause for an all-hands-on-deck call from the court,” he said.
Judge Merchan felt the need to sound the alarm and alert the parties involved as Jurors were strictly forbidden from discussing the case.
“Today, the Court became aware of a comment that was posted on the Unified Court System’s public Facebook page and which I now bring to your attention.
“In the comment, the user, ‘Michael Anderson,’ states: ’My cousin is a juror and says Trump is getting convicted! Thank you folks for all your hard work!!!!’” A comment by the same user on a different post said, “Thank you for all your hard [sic] against the MAGA crazies! My cousin is a juror on Trumps criminal case and they’re going to convict him tomorrow according to her.”
But let’s not forget the real issue at hand here – the integrity of the jury process. This is not about politics, folks. This is about justice. If this comment was indeed from a juror, it could potentially render the entire verdict meaningless. As attorney William Trachman states, a mistrial could result if outside influences were brought into the jury deliberation room. It’s a grave issue and one that cannot be taken lightly.
However, before we go issuing a celebration tweet to Trump, it’s important to wait for all the facts to come to light. While this potential juror’s comment is disturbing, it may not be enough to warrant a new trial. As former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani explains, the defense must prove not only an outside influence but also that it had a direct effect on the outcome of the case. This is no easy feat, folks.
But make no mistake, if this comment was indeed from a juror who discussed the case prior to closing arguments, it is a serious offense. As Cornell Law School professor William Jacobson points out, it would be very likely for the judge to overturn the guilty verdict if this is true. And that, my friends, would be the ultimate slap in the face to the American justice system.
So, as we await Trump’s virtual interview with a probation officer on Monday, let’s not get ahead of ourselves. But if this comment is proven to be true, it will only further solidify the fact that New York City is no place for a fair trial.
