The Importance of Anonymous Juries in High-Profile Trials: Unveiling the Evolution of Jury Anonymity in the US

Sign up for free to receive a version of this story in CNN’s What Matters newsletter. Simply click here to get it in your inbox.

The judge in former President Donald Trump's hush money criminal trial is facing challenges in safeguarding the anonymity of jurors as Trump spreads conspiracy theories about infiltrators.

Juries like the one being selected for the Trump trial in New York are given anonymity to protect them while they fulfill their civic duty. This practice was originally used for cases involving violent criminal organizations, but it is now being used more frequently. It is often used in high-profile cases and can also be at the discretion of judges in certain states. The rules regarding anonymity for juries can vary.

A full 12-person jury has been chosen for the Trump trial in New York following Thursday's proceedings. However, additional alternate jurors are still needed.

The idea of anonymous juries is still relatively new. The first one in US history was assembled in New York in 1977 for the trial of Leroy “Nicky” Barnes, a drug kingpin known as Mr. Untouchable, as reported by The New York Times. Barnes, who was famous for avoiding conviction, drew the attention of then-President Jimmy Carter. Carter instructed the Justice Department to handle the case with extra care, resulting in a guilty verdict.

In that particular case, even the lawyers were not allowed to know the identities of the jurors. This went a step further than the precautions taken for the Trump trial in New York. Both the prosecutors and Trump’s defense team have been closely examining the social media profiles and backgrounds of potential jurors in Judge Juan Merchan’s courtroom.

Merchan agreed in March to seal most information about the jurors, as requested by prosecutors. Trump's lawyers also did not object to this agreement.

In a separate case related to Trump, the jury that found him liable for sexual abuse and defamation of E. Jean Carroll was completely anonymous. Just like the case involving Barnes, the identities of the jurors were not disclosed to either side.

Jeremy Herb of CNN recently discussed Trump's behavior in previous cases involving juries.

In today's hyperconnected social media world, maintaining anonymity is a challenge. One juror, who was selected for the panel on Tuesday, was dismissed by the judge on Thursday because her identity had been revealed.

Aspects of my identity have already been out there in the public.

Former Juror No. 2

Former Juror No. 2 shared that yesterday, friends, colleagues, and family bombarded my phone with inquiries about my identity as a juror. Merchan scolded the press for releasing details that could reveal the jurors' identities.

Merchan expressed disappointment in court, stating that they had lost a potential strong juror. The individual had expressed feeling fearful and intimidated by the presence of the press.

Learn more about Merchan's confrontation with the press by checking out CNN's coverage from Hadas Gold.

Trump recently posted on social media, quoting Fox News host Jesse Watters, suggesting that "undercover Liberal Activists" were attempting to join the jury in his prosecution. However, there is no evidence to back up this claim.

It is important to note that for the prosecution to secure a guilty verdict, they need every juror to agree with them. On the other hand, Trump only needs one juror to vote for acquittal to result in a hung jury. Additionally, there will be a special hearing next week to determine if Trump has violated a gag order due to his ongoing social media attacks.

When anonymous juries go wrong

Maybe Trump remembers one of the most infamous, anonymous jury incidents, featuring another famous New Yorker, the mob boss John Gotti.

The anonymity of jurors in a 1987 case allowed the jury foreman, who had connections to organized crime, to contact Gotti and ensure a hung jury in exchange for bribes.

Informer Salvatore “Sammy the Bull” Gravano, who testified against Gotti, also revealed that juror George Pape had been bribed. Pape, along with the other 11 jurors, voted to acquit Gotti. The tainted acquittal could not be overturned due to protection against double jeopardy. Gotti was eventually imprisoned for different charges.

There is a significant contrast between the government's intense crackdown on organized crime in the 1980s using racketeering charges and Trump's prosecution for falsifying a business record to violate campaign laws.

Despite this disparity, Trump continues to enjoy unwavering support from his followers, who are willing to resort to violent actions on his behalf, such as the invasion of the US Capitol. As a result, it seems appropriate for anonymity to be granted in this case, even though it may conflict with the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of a public and impartial trial.

We know that Merchan advised news outlets to avoid revealing information that could identify the jurors, such as physical descriptions. He also prohibited the inclusion of details from the jury questionnaire, such as their places of business.

CNN

Related article

What to know about the jurors seated on Donald Trump’s criminal trial

There is publicly available information about the jurors, such as their genders, professions, and family situations. It is possible that determined internet sleuths or loose-lipped acquaintances could uncover their identities.

During the process, investigations are being carried out in real time on the jurors. Trump's defense team is looking through their old social media posts and questioning them about it.

Prosecutors are searching for issues with jurors. Another juror, a Puerto Rican grandfather who mentioned finding Trump “fascinating and mysterious,” was dismissed on Thursday. The reasons for his dismissal are not completely known, but prosecutors told the judge they found someone with the same name who was arrested in the 1990s for removing political ads.

A surprising incident

Thursday’s court session concluded with a complete 12-person jury being selected. These jurors will now have the responsibility of judging a former and potentially future president.

According to jury consultant Alan Tuerkheimer in an interview with CNN’s Omar Jimenez on Max, jurors often do not expect to be chosen when they show up. Being sworn in as part of a panel can be quite surprising for them, even in a regular case. Considering the significance of this particular case, the experience can be even more impactful.

Editor's P/S:

The article highlights the challenges faced in safeguarding the anonymity of jurors in high-profile trials, particularly in the face of baseless conspiracy theories spread by the defendant. In the case of Donald Trump's hush money trial, the judge has been tasked with balancing the need for juror protection with the principles of transparency and public accountability.

It is crucial to maintain the anonymity of jurors to ensure their safety and unbiased decision-making. However, the advent of social media and the prevalence of online sleuthing make it increasingly difficult to guarantee their privacy. Judges must be vigilant in protecting jurors' identities and holding accountable those who attempt to compromise their anonymity. Additionally, it is essential for the public to respect the boundaries of jury secrecy and refrain from engaging in activities that could potentially jeopardize the integrity of the trial.