An Upper East Side investment banker, a high school teacher who likes to sew, a Mexico-born man who listens to podcasts about gay issues, a Harlem woman from a family of police officers and a bookseller who believes “no one is above the law.”
These were just some of the hundreds of New Yorkers who on Tuesday reported to a Lower Manhattan courtroom for jury duty in the first criminal prosecution of a former American president. Depending on their politics, media diets and views on Donald J. Trump, any one could join the group of 12 citizens who will sit in judgment of him.
Not until midafternoon Tuesday did Mr. Trump’s lawyers and prosecutors select the first six jurors for the case, which centers on allegations that the former president falsified documents to cover up a sex scandal involving a porn star. Dozens were dismissed after saying they could not be fair, underscoring the towering task of trying a former president in a city where he is deeply unpopular.
The lawyers reached the heart of the selection process early in the afternoon, when they began bringing individual people from the jury pool back into the courtroom to question them alone as they debated who should be dismissed. But that process was quickly interrupted when the judge, Juan M. Merchan, scolded Mr. Trump for muttering and gesturing while one of the potential jurors was being interviewed.
“I won’t tolerate that,” the judge said, raising his voice once the potential juror had left the room. “I will not have any jurors intimidated in this courtroom.”
The pool of possible jurors came from an initial group of 96, more than half of whom were dismissed immediately on Monday after indicating that they could not fairly reach a decision. Others returned on Tuesday, only to change their minds after taking a night to think about it. “I don’t think I can be as impartial and unbiased as I hoped I could be,” one admitted. Another claimed to have recognized an “unconscious bias” against the former president.
Mr. Trump, who faces 34 felony counts and may take the witness stand in his own defense, has denied all wrongdoing. But during the 2016 presidential campaign, prosecutors say, Mr. Trump directed his fixer, Michael D. Cohen, to pay hush money to the porn star, Stormy Daniels. And while serving as president, he had his company falsify records to hide his reimbursement of Mr. Cohen.
Prosecutors say it was part of a pattern for Mr. Trump: Faced with stories that could have doomed his campaign, he concealed them to influence the election. If the jury convicts him, he faces up to four years behind bars.
Tuesday’s batch of potential jurors mirrored their city of 8.4 million, the most populous in the nation: They were diverse, opinionated, hard to pigeonhole. They were there involuntarily, because jury duty is an inescapable responsibility of citizenship.
It can be tedious, exhausting or even exhilarating to judge a fellow American, someone a juror has never met or thought of before a trial convenes.
But everyone knows Donald Trump, the former reality television star turned polarizing president, who is once again the presumptive Republican nominee. And in this landmark case, the first of Mr. Trump’s four indictments to move to trial, the possible jurors are carrying a burden of history that appeared to agonize some of them.
Some acknowledged they could not be fair. The investment banker said he was just too busy to give up the next two months of his life.
Others embraced the moment, and even sought to persuade both the defense and prosecution that they could be fair.
A woman from the Upper West Side described herself as “a public servant,” adding that she had “built my entire career on trying to serve the city that I live in.” Jury duty, she proudly declared, was an extension of that, “of what’s required of me as a citizen.”
Todd Blanche, one of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, questioned the bookseller, trying to elicit the his views on the former president. But the bookseller rebuffed him, saying that his opinion “has absolutely no bearing on the case.” He finally acknowledged he was a Democrat — like an overwhelming majority of Manhattan residents — but did not budge further.
For Mr. Blanche and the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, who brought the case against Mr. Trump, jury selection is pivotal. Legal experts say the case might well be won or lost by their choices.
And although prosecutors might have the upper hand in one of the most Democratic counties in the country, there were glimmers of hope for Mr. Trump on Tuesday. Just one stubborn juror can torpedo a case and hang a jury, an outcome that would be a victory for Mr. Trump.
The woman from Harlem who hails from the family of police officers said she appreciated Mr. Trump’s bombastic style, and referred to him as “President Trump,” a title that suggested respect and the one his own lawyers use in court.
“President Trump speaks his mind, and I’d rather that than someone who’s in office who you don’t know what they’re thinking,” she said.
A white-haired woman became animated when asked whether she would hold it against Mr. Trump if he did not testify.
“That’s your right. You can’t presume that makes him guilty,” she said, waving her hands for emphasis as she uttered the words every defense lawyer wants to hear. “The prosecutor’s the one that has to present those facts and prove them,” she added.
Mr. Blanche replied, “I don’t think I could have said it better myself.”
There were moments of levity. One woman, answering a question about whether she knew anyone in the legal field, said, “I dated a lawyer for a while.” She paused. “It ended fine.”
Mr. Trump did not laugh, but he did take pleasure in hearing from a prospective juror who had enjoyed his celebrity turn on reality television. “I was a big fan of ‘The Apprentice’ when I was in middle school,” the man said, drawing a smile from Mr. Trump.
Other potential jurors told stories about how crime had affected their families, including a man whose daughter was the victim of a violent sexual assault. He said he had read “Trump: The Art of the Deal” and two other books by the former president, eliciting an approving nod from the author. But the potential juror remarked, “I feel no one is above the law.”
The man born in Mexico said he had become a U.S. citizen in the first year of Mr. Trump’s presidency. When asked whether anything about that experience would prejudice his role as a juror, he replied, “Feelings are not facts,” adding, “I’m very grateful to be an American.”
A woman who has lived in New York for 50 years observed, in perhaps something of an understatement, that Mr. Trump was “notable.” She said that although she had relatives who support him, she and Mr. Trump had “very little we probably agree on.”
Still, she said, “I consider myself a thoughtful person,” and “I know I’ll be able to separate my policy issues from what is going on in here.”
Although Mr. Trump’s trial absorbed much of the courthouse’s energy, plenty of people were summoned to serve on juries in other cases.
Mark DeMuro, a 71-year-old artist, said he was thankful he would not have to sit in judgment of Mr. Trump, whom he called “a loathsome character.”
“I could never serve on that jury; I would never risk the trial,” Mr. DeMuro said, adding, “I pray for the people who get selected.”
The post Prosecutors and Defense Lawyers Begin to Seat Jurors for Trump Trial appeared first on New York Times.