Trump’s Attorneys Allege Juror Misconduct in New York Case

We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

The attorneys disagree with the district attorney on how much information should be released to the public.

President-Elect Donald Trump’s attorneys have alleged evidence of “grave juror misconduct” in his falsified business records case that has been playing out in New York.

A heavily redacted letter from Dec. 3 and published by the court on Dec. 17 showed Trump’s attorneys stating that the misconduct “violated President Trump’s rights under the federal Constitution and New York law.”

The specific allegations are unclear, and recently released correspondence showed Trump’s attorneys disagreeing with Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office over how much information to release.

The correspondence was published by the court after the judge, New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, issued an order and letter rejecting multiple arguments the president-elect had made about immunity.

In a Dec. 16 letter, Merchan said that the court made additional redactions following redactions made by the different parties. He noted, however, that the allegations were unsworn and that unless a claim of juror misconduct was properly filed under New York law, “this Court cannot allow the public filing of unsworn, and admittedly contested statements.”

“To do so,” Merchan said, “would threaten the safety of the jurors. … Should a properly filed claim be submitted, these redactions will be revisited.”

He also indicated a hearing was needed to evaluate the claims but said that the defense opposed having a hearing. “Allegations of juror misconduct should be thoroughly investigated,” Merchan said. “However, this Court is prohibited from deciding such claims on the basis of mere hearsay and conjecture.”

Trump’s attorneys argued in their Dec. 3 letter that their client couldn’t pursue appropriate remedies until the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit had ruled on Trump’s request to remove the case to federal court.

In a letter to Merchan on Dec. 5, Bragg’s office requested that the Dec. 3 letter and related correspondence be kept under seal. His office seemed to suggest that Trump’s attorneys had misrepresented the alleged misconduct.

“[T]he excerpts of the communications that counsel did share included a communication from [redacted] in which [redacted] plainly stated that counsel’s recitation of the purported juror misconduct—the same misconduct chronicled in the Dec. 3 letter—‘contains inaccuracies and does not contain additional information that I never shared,’” the letter stated.

It added that “[a]ccording to counsel’s own recitation of events, [redacted] rejected several attempts to get [redacted] to endorse the factual allegations that serve as the basis of the Dec. 3 letter.”

The letter went on to accuse Trump of failing to provide an adequate record.

“Had defendant provided the sworn allegations required to make a proper motion … a hearing at which [redacted] allegations could be fully explored in a public forum might indeed be warranted,” it read.

“What he seeks instead is to inject his unsworn, untested, and at least partially inaccurate allegations into the public domain while simultaneously opposing any endeavor to properly evaluate them.”

A series of successive letters from the defense and prosecution followed with Trump’s attorneys accusing Bragg’s office of trying to keep important information secret. While his attorneys favored certain redactions, they indicated they thought the prosecution’s requests went too far and said that the public had a right of access to criminal proceedings.

“These rights of public access to criminal proceedings serve important interests in advancing the fair administration of justice, promoting public confidence in the judiciary, permitting public scrutiny of matters of great public interest, and defending the fundamental rights of the accused,” his attorneys said in a Dec. 9 letter to Merchan.

Merchan’s Dec. 16 letter stated that the court “must balance the competing interests of the public’s right to transparency of these proceedings against the very real need to protect the privacy and safety of the jurors.”

Bragg’s office also accused Trump on Dec. 9 of trying to undermine public confidence in the verdict. In May, a jury found Trump guilty on 34 felony counts. Trump has denied wrongdoing.

In a post to TruthSocial on Dec. 17, Trump criticized Merchan’s decisions on the immunity arguments. Merchan had “completely disrespected the United States Supreme Court, and its Historic Decision on Immunity,” he said.

The president-elect said the case itself is illegitimate, and the opinion written by Merchan “goes against our Constitution, and, if allowed to stand, would be the end of the Presidency as we know it.”

Merchan said that Trump waited too long or failed to preserve objections to evidence and that information related to both preserved and unpreserved arguments did not receive protection under the doctrine of presidential immunity.

The controversy came as the Supreme Court declined on Dec. 16 a podcaster’s request to lift gag orders Trump faced in New York. Podcaster Joseph Nieman argued that his rights as a member of the media were violated by the orders.

On TruthSocial, Trump said that “Merchan has so little respect for the Constitution that he is keeping in place an illegal gag order on me.”

Earlier this year, the New York Supreme Court’s First Appellate Division upheld a gag order on Trump while stating that Merchan “properly determined that petitioner’s public statements posed a significant threat to the integrity of the testimony of witnesses and potential witnesses in this case as well.”

Matthew Vadum and Jack Phillips contributed to this report.