Representative Byron Donalds pleaded with potential jurors in Trump’s hush-money trial to vote “not guilty.”
The Republican Party is all in on Donald Trump, so much so that at least one representative is trying to sway his legal proceedings.
Ahead of the start of the Republican presidential pick’s first criminal trial on Monday, Representative Byron Donalds pleaded with the people of Manhattan to give his party leader a break.
“My plea is to the people of Manhattan that may sit on this trial: Please do the right thing for this country,” the Florida congressman told Newsmax. “Everybody’s allowed to have their political viewpoints, but the law is supposed to be blind and no respecter of persons. This is a trash case, there is no crime here, and if there is any potential for a verdict, they should vote not guilty.”
Is that not jury tampering?
It doesn’t appear this person actually communicated directly with any jurors on the case; rather, he expressed an opinion about what the jurors should do, while speaking to a fascist propaganda service (Newsmax).
He was clearly at least superficially trying to directly address the potential jurors on a wide reaching platform.
I doubt it’s proscecutable, but he is certainly attempting to taint the jury pool. I wonder if the judge can hold random people not involved in the trial accountable for interfering with the trial from the outside.
As a total lay person, I have no clue what the technical definition of jury tampering is. I looked up NY law:
I guess “communicates with” is the key part. He’s shouting publicly at any potential juror and doing so prior to the jury being selected. So I’d guess not in this case?
He is clearly stating that his intended audience is the jurers. How is that not communicating with them?
Because guilty, appeal, guilty, appeal, scotus something something free speech, dismissed.
I’d bet money on it if it ever comes to point. This should be a slam dunk but we don’t live in those times anymore. The law has become a weapon that’s applied and dismissed on a whim.
Yeah. Hard to deny who he intended to speak to when he states who he’s publicly speaking to knowing the clip will be put on TV…
I guess this is stochastic jury tampering.
As a lay person, I agree. If “publishing in the media” is indeed “communicating” (which I see as such), then this guy does at least attempt to tamper jurors.
Are there any penalties involved in that law?
Which it would not be otherwise all the right wing propaganda outlets that go even further would be facing serious charges that are trivial to prove.
Yes. It is definitely jury tampering.
But a conservative is doing it and they get a free pass to do anything because they have zero morals.