Those calls came after numerous media outlets reported potentially identifying biographical information about the woman, including her job and the neighborhood she called home. Fox News Jesse Watters highlighted the juror’s details while reading through public pool notes about the selected members. “This nurse scares me if I’m Trump,” Watters said.

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    267
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Holy shit did Fox News just intimidate a juror in a high profile trial?

    Edit - just got to this bit

    Other outlets including NBC News, CNN, CBS News, and ABC News also publicized details about the juror, including additional identifying information.

    What the fuck? How is this even in the public domain?

    • TwoBeeSan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      123
      ·
      8 months ago

      I walked by a tv at work today on CNN.

      They were literally discussing the profession and reading habits of a juror.

      Big ass question mark greyed out female, and a host making the biggest deal over the fact a juror reads NYT.

      It’s fucking scary I’d drop the fuck out too. These piranhas are gonna oust any information about you for views. The news is beyond a joke, completely agree with you, how this is public domain and tolerated is more telling to our status as a nation.

      • Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        This is going to be the delay he wants if the US media goes full OJ here. Which they likely will - some to benefit Trump, all for the views. Juror protection be damned.

      • CptEnder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yeah it’s pretty crazy even MSNBC was covering some of their details yesterday, but tried to scale it back today. The reality is this info is being put out on the wires to all press agencies. The real one to blame it the judge for not locking down the procedures or how and what the lawyers can ask.

        • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          We’re in the age of facial recognition, you don’t even need to hire a PI to identify jurors. These cases are going to get someone killed even without the goddamn media acting like idiots.

      • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’d write back to every death threat, informing them of my ready and willingness to do honourable combat, but I do not blame anybody for dropping out under duress.

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      203
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      No no no. This is just witness tampering and obstruction of justice. Oh, and stochastic terrorism, yes. So, yes.

      • Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        You guys just don’t understand! Any media organization not tampering with the jury pool is just a leftist rag!

        Why is there no unbiased news?!?! All I want is an unbiased news source that covers the news conservatives care about - like where I can find these jurors to threaten!

        • boreengreen@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          If only there were some kind of fairness doctrine, that forced news organisations to make an honest attempt to report both sides.

    • mibo80@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      61
      ·
      8 months ago

      Exactly, knowing ahead of time all of this should have been sealed by default. Anytime the defendant/case is this high profile the whole thing should be sealed off to contain this circus.

      • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        8 months ago

        It doesn’t matter. Trump will literally call them out himself. And nothing will happen when he does.

        The system is broken. It is not breaking, it is fucking BROKEN.

    • geekworking@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      It doesn’t sound like it was released.

      It seems like stuff from jury selection questions that some court audience members noted. The court already blocked recording.

      They remove the audience, but that’s a double-edged sword since no public transparency even for reporters would fuel all of the conspiracy crap and there would be no information available to debunk. This is Trumps wet dream. Being able to spout pure fantasy with nobody to rebut.

      Best solution would be for the judge to clamp down to say that he will charge anyone who leaks any jury info with contempt.

      • xantoxis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        8 months ago

        The judge may have been anticipating this media circus. Now there’s a clear reason to remove the audience, so it’s safer.

        Trump was going to spout lies and nonsense no matter what, and the people who believe him now will believe him no matter what. My money says the judge just wanted an excuse–and we’ll see a complete lockdown with no audience from now on.

    • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      8 months ago

      Well, they have now made it where the employment and past employment questions stricken from the record and have instructed all media not to report the answers to those portions of the questionnaire. That’s what she felt identified her.

      But I agree in spirit.

      • BigFig@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        8 months ago

        Why is the press even in the room or present in any way when that information is being discussed

        • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          8 months ago

          Because generally these things wouldn’t be a problem. Except that trump and his followers have a history of grasping at every straw, defaming anyone they can, and getting people hurt for no good reason.

    • melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      fuck them for not crucifying these anchors before lunch.

      they’re not legitimate and neither are the laws they represent. its just thugs with guns and excuses to shoot.

  • Neato@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    177
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    If the courts don’t immediately arrest and charge this person with juror intimidation/tampering then it’s all over. The fascist mob will figure out who the jurors are and threaten their families en masse because there will be no consequences.

  • toiletobserver@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    113
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    At what point does this become jury tampering? Veiled threats should never be taken lightly, especially since Fox is an entertainment organization and not news, as they’ve argued in court previously.

        • DontMakeMoreBabies@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          There are loads of people who believe this and I think that sometimes folks need to remember that’s reality.

          Shithead antisocial people exist - that’s why there must be consequences up to and including violence (if that’s all someone can understand).

            • feddylemmy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              8 months ago

              They could be meaning it in a UK kind of way. They have anti-social behaviour orders and such. Slightly different meaning than someone who doesn’t like people.

              • TIMMAY@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                8 months ago

                someone made a comment with an opinion you dont agree with, so they are automatically “antisocial”?

                • aibler@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  No, I just made a joke at the expense of someone who jumped straight into suggesting the use of violence. To me, violence is a bit antisocial generally. You’d do great in a comedy club audience.

    • NuXCOM_90Percent
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      8 months ago

      Because the goal is to declare this a mistrial. Break as many rules as possible, get thrown in contempt, etc. Because those will be MUCH smaller penalties/fines and will drag out the clock until after the election.

      Whereas grinning and bearing it lets the courts actually try to get some semblance of justice.

  • hperrin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    Using terrorism to protect a criminal (again). The Republican Party cannot possibly be redeemed.

  • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    If they get one or two of these Jurors KILLED they’re going to get a VERY STERN letter from the Judge!

  • Jaysyn@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’ve read that Jury Tampering has a very low bar in New York. Pretty sure Watters just crossed it.

  • just_another_person@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    8 months ago

    So 90% of a jury of his peers fucking hate him, and will conclude he did the crime. Oh my God, sounds like he’s going to jail. You really need to keep churning the group until you find the select few who think he’s innocent of a crime? The obviousness says something.

    And, no, haters, this is not what jury selection looks like. 10 years as a trial lawyer, and never ONCE were any of my selections broadcast on TV. This shit should illegal.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’m just a middle aged white guy and I know this isn’t normal because it’s never happened in my life unless the news is talking about jury tampering that already happened.

  • Makeitstop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    8 months ago

    Watters has alleged without evidence that “liberal activists” are lying to get on the jury, a claim that Trump himself has repeated on Truth Social, potentially violating a gag order.

    It’s like they saw Trump, Giuliani and Alex Jones all get absolutely fucked in court for defamation, contemplated their own settlement with Dominion and the 2.7 billion dollar lawsuit pending from Smartmatic, and said to themselves “now seems like a good time to endanger innocent people by spewing inflammatory bullshit.”

    Not that I expect them to learn a lesson if they aren’t bankrupted or actually sent to prison.

  • penquin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    8 months ago

    This Watters dude is so smug. I hate his guts. His existence bothers me.