Difficult hunt for 12 unbiased jurors in historic Trump trial

On the first day of Donald Trump's hush money trial, dozens of prospective jurors were sent home in a matter of minutes after they told the judge they could not be impartial.

Hundreds of prospective jurors from across Manhattan will face similar vetting in the coming days, as lawyers seek to compose a fair panel in the first-ever criminal trial of a former president.

Donald Trump is accused of falsifying his business records to disguise a hush-money payment made shortly before the 2016 election to an adult film star with whom he allegedly had an affair.

It will be up to the Manhattan District Attorney's Office and Mr Trump's legal team to find 12 New Yorkers capable of setting aside their feelings about Mr Trump to give him a fair trial.

Mr Trump's lawyers have already complained that the city's Manhattan borough, comprised predominantly of Democrats, will not allow for an impartial jury.

And experts agree it will prove challenging.

"There's nobody in the country who doesn't have an opinion one way or another," former Manhattan prosecutor Jeremy Saland says.

"But those in New York have been exposed to Donald Trump and his father and children for literally generations, from every tabloid to the internet to Home Alone."

"A jury should be fair no matter what, listen to the evidence and hold prosecutors to the burden," he says.

"So no easy task."

42 questions to hundreds of people

The jury process involves several stages that could last well over a week, former Brooklyn and Manhattan prosecutors told the BBC.

Because of the high-profile nature of the trial, as many as 500 people from Manhattan and neighbouring Roosevelt Island could be chosen as prospective jurors.

From this group, the defence and the prosecution - overseen by Justice Juan Merchan - will select 12 and several alternates to be seated.

Those jurors will be anonymous to the public, but Mr Trump's team and prosecutors will know their identities.

Jurors who are unable to participate in the six-week trial because of childcare obligations or travel restrictions will also be dismissed, says Julie Rendelman, a former Brooklyn prosecutor.

On Monday, one man was dismissed by the judge after he said he might miss his child's wedding.

However, experts say the biggest challenge will be removing those who cannot maintain impartiality.

"Everyone, anyone, no matter who you are, no matter whether you wear blue or red goggles, needs to give the former president the same rights that any of us do, which is that he's innocent until proven guilty," says Mr Saland, the former Manhattan prosecutor.

To start weeding out those who are biased, prosecutors and the defence team have begun analysing questionnaires filled out by the prospective jurors.

The jurors were asked questions including which news outlets they read and what podcasts they listen to; whether they follow Mr Trump on social media and if they have ever attended a rally for the former president.

They were asked if they support or consider themselves a part of any right- or left-wing radical groups, specifically:

• The QAnon movement: an online movement based around a sprawling conspiracy theory that alleges elites in politics, the media and business operate a child-trafficking network

• Proud Boys: an all-male fraternity founded in 2016, Proud Boys regularly participated in violent street protests and pro-Trump events

• Oath Keepers: a militia made up of current and former military members, law enforcement officials and other first responders

• Three Percenters: another anti-government, pro-gun rights movement, the Three Percenters were co-founded by an Oath Keepers member

• Boogaloo Boys: a nebulous anti-government movement that made waves during anti-lockdown and Black Lives Matter protests in 2020

• Antifa: short for "anti-fascist", this loose confederation of left-wing activists swelled in numbers and activity after Mr Trump was elected

Mr Merchan has stressed that jurors will not be dismissed based on political affiliation alone. "The issue is if the juror can be impartial and can reach a verdict consistent with the law," he said in February.

But Mr Trump's lawyers have already sparred with the defence about what exactly this means.

Lawyers for the DA's Office previously argued anyone who believed President Joe Biden did not legitimately win the 2020 presidential election should be disqualified from serving on the jury, a question that drew objections from Mr Trump's team.

Ultimately, the query was not included in the 42 questions potential jurors must answer.

They were also asked if they have ever served on a jury before, and if so, if they reached a verdict.

People who have served on a hung jury - a case where a jury could not reach a verdict - are less likely to be picked because "the concern is they're the ones who hung it up", says former Manhattan prosecutor Diana Florence.

Potential jurors also must indicate if they or close family and friends have ever been a victim of a crime, and if so, which one. This allows both sides to judge whether someone might be prejudiced in Mr Trump's falsification of business records case because of previous experiences.

Some of the questions are even more personal, asking jurors what their children do for a living and if they take any medication that would prevent them from being able to concentrate during the trial.

'Vetting' jurors

Prosecutors and Mr Trump's legal team are able to challenge those that they don't want to be included on the jury.

Each side has 10 "peremptory" challenges, jurors they can dismiss for no particular reason, said Ms Florence.

Both Mr Trump and the DA's Office have an unlimited number of "for cause" challenges, meaning they need a valid reason to dismiss those jurors.

This time will prove pivotal for both sides to remove people who will not be objective about the trial, including those intentionally trying to make their way onto the case by misrepresenting their views on Mr Trump, Mr Saland says.

"It's critical that the prosecutors and the defence vet those jurors and get rid of those that they think are not going to do their job," he adds.

To help, lawyers for the defence and prosecution will probably hire experts to comb through jurors' social media posts, which can provide a "treasure trove of information as to their potential views and biases", Ms Rendelman said.

Both sides are also looking for those who have not yet made up their mind about the case - a significant challenge for a trial that has received such intense media coverage.

But Mr Trump's case won't be the first high-profile trial for prosecutors and defence teams looking for an impartial pool of New Yorkers, experts noted.

It took almost two weeks to narrow down jurors for disgraced Hollywood director Harvey Weinstein's New York sexual assault trial in 2020.

It could take just as much time - if not more - to find people willing to grant Mr Trump a fair trial, Ms Rendelman says.

"We are human, and so our biases creep in, even when we don't want them to," she adds.

"It's doable, but it's going to be difficult."

With additional reporting from Mike Wendling