E Carroll Judge Boots Out Trump Voters From Jury Selection

[justoffal]

Just curious...

Has there been any reliable confirmation that if someone just voted for Trump that they were rejected for jury duty?

WW

It's a great point of contention I'll tell you that.
If the applications are reviewed and that one thread does indeed exist throughout the rejections it's a valid monkey wrench.

 

[Grumpyolman]

Hopefully, we can dispose of all these lawfare partisan BS attacks and get down to the process of selecting the next POTUS. God Bless America!

 

[Auld Phart]

Hahaha

You believe any idiotic lie. Poor little guy.

 

[Concerned American]

Here you go...

Trump lost his best possible juror in the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial: a man who thought the 2020 election was stolen

Trump lost one of his best possible jurors when the man said he thought the 2020 election was stolen and that courts were treating Trump unfairly.

www.businessinsider.com

That is a far cry from asking him how he voted. The question was not how he voted. Read the OP

 

[mudwhistle]

Who the fuck is going to select a juror that thinks the 2020 election was stolen? Hyper-partisan candidates should not be part of the jury pool. It's bad enough we have that **** bitch judge Eileen Cannon down in Florida dragging her partisan feet in the classified documents case.

Juror's should be objective, fair and intelligent. There isn't a single Trump supporter in the entire country that fits that bill!

Number 1, that's not what they asked them.
That isn't the issue in the lawsuit.
And it's none of their business how people voted.

 

[justoffal]

" THERE ISN'T A SINGLE TRUMP SUPPORTER THAT FITS THAT DESCRIPTION "

You just enumerated a perfect fail for the case if that's the attitude being used....sounds like it is.

 

[justoffal]

Number 1, that's not what they asked them.
That isn't the issue in the lawsuit.
And it's none of their business how people voted.

BUT! Don't be surprised if all the rejections have that in common. I'd say given the political atmosphere here it's possible.

 

[mudwhistle]

BUT! Don't be surprised if all the rejections have that in common. I'd say given the political atmosphere here it's possible.

What part of jury of your peers don't you understand?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Who the fuck is going to select a juror that thinks the 2020 election was stolen? Hyper-partisan candidates should not be part of the jury pool. It's bad enough we have that **** bitch judge Eileen Cannon down in Florida dragging her partisan feet in the classified documents case.

Number 1, that's not what they asked them.

Trump lost his best possible juror in the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial: a man who thought the 2020 election was stolen

Trump lost one of his best possible jurors when the man said he thought the 2020 election was stolen and that courts were treating Trump unfairly.

www.businessinsider.com

WW

 

[justoffal]

What part of jury of your peers don't you understand?

I understand that if it's a common thread in all of the rejections or even most of them it's a big deal for appeal.

 

[Freedomisneverfree]

Liberals love what is happening with E Carrol, unless of course, it was happening to them.. What goes around comes back around.

You Liberals think its fair she is getting an all Liberal Jury?

 

[Concerned American]

Trump lost his best possible juror in the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial: a man who thought the 2020 election was stolen

Trump lost one of his best possible jurors when the man said he thought the 2020 election was stolen and that courts were treating Trump unfairly.

www.businessinsider.com

View attachment 890979

WW

Read the OP. That question did not ask how the juror voted. I believe it is an improper question, but bottom line, during voir dire, they don't need a reason to dismiss. However their challenges are limited.

 

[justoffal]

Liberals love what is happening with E Carrol, unless of course, it was happening to them.. What goes around comes back around.

You Liberals think its fair she is getting an all Liberal Jury?

APPEAL....APPEAL.....APPEAL

 

[justoffal]

Read the OP. That question did not ask how the juror voted. I believe it is an improper question, but bottom line, during voir dire, they don't need a reason to dismiss. However their challenges are limited.

And subject to review on appeal

 

[WorldWatcher]

Read the OP. That question did not ask how the juror voted.

Ya, that was the claim of the OP not based on reporting, but because some random guy on Twitter said it.

I believe it is an improper question, but bottom line, during voir dire, they don't need a reason to dismiss. However their challenges are limited.

#1 I agree, there is no evidence that such a question was asked.

#2 You mis-state voir dire. The Bench has unlimited dismissals. It's the claimant/respondent (civil) and prosecutor/defendant (criminal) that have a limited number of challenges.

WW

 

[mudwhistle]

 

[justoffal]

Either the judge is purposely giving Trump a successful appeal or he really is just that stupid.
Add that to jury shopping with bias....you have overturn.

 

[justoffal]

View attachment 890980

Ya, that was the claim of the OP not based on reporting, but because some random guy on Twitter said it.



#1 I agree, there is no evidence that such a question was asked.

#2 You mis-state voir dire. The Bench has unlimited dismissals. It's the claimant/respondent (civil) and prosecutor/defendant (criminal) that have a limited number of challenges.

WW

The Bench is also subject to scrutiny however...and in this case should the defense find a common thread in the rejections.....it's a potential mistrial.

 

[Concerned American]

View attachment 890980

Ya, that was the claim of the OP not based on reporting, but because some random guy on Twitter said it.



#1 I agree, there is no evidence that such a question was asked.

#2 You mis-state voir dire. The Bench has unlimited dismissals. It's the claimant/respondent (civil) and prosecutor/defendant (criminal) that have a limited number of challenges.

WW

The bench has NO challenges under voir dire. Those are reserved for the defense and prosecution from what I can find. If you can find something that says a sitting judge can dismiss under the selection process, I would be interested in seeing it.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The Bench is also subject to scrutiny however...and in this case should the defense find a common thread in the rejections.....it's a potential mistrial.

The OP claimed they asked how they voted and rejected them if they didn't answer "No".

Source? Some random guy on the internet.

You really think a Judge with 30 years on the bench is going to do that?

I mean a lawyer that has to be schooled on evidence 101 and who was the lawyer for parking garage maybe? But a 30 year Federal Judge? Highly doubtful without proof.

(And yes, jurors are rejected all the time for being affiliated with a defendant.)

WW