Most of the crimes happened in Washington, DC, but some, like the fake electoral certificates, also extended to other States. How would they decide which district to try the case in, and who would be eligible to serve on the jury?
I assume the trial would be held where was he residing when the crime allegedly occurred. I’d guess Washington DC or maybe Florida, depending on which crime you’re talking about.
I read elsewhere that it’d all be DC.
So assume Washington. But Washington is part of a larger Federal Court “District” covering several States, right? Would the jury pool be drawn from just Washington voters, or from voters in whatever city the District courthouse is in, or from all voters in the District?
No, D.C. is it’s own federal district. So jurors in a trial there would come from the District. And, interestingly, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals would hear any appeals.
All other district courts are part of “circuits,” multi-state regions lumped together for federal Circuit Courts of Appeal.
Aha! Good to know.
My understanding is that because the alleged crimes around the January 6th insurrection occurred in Washington DC and while Trump was housed in DC, the DC Circuit has jurisdiction.
Re the Mar-a-Lago documents case, the DC Circuit has jurisdiction over any crime involving classified materials, so no jurisdictional squabble over that, either.
Everything will be heard in DC, with jurors selected from there. But it’s still years away, I expect – if it even gets to that point.
Any trial may be a long way off, but it significantly increases the pressure. He’s not going to get a MAGA jury nullification in D.C.
I dunno. Trump has been under legal pressure for many, many years. If there is one thing he is adept at it is delaying legal consequences and he has never seemed overly bothered by them. I see no reason he will not do the same here and run this for years.
Heck, he is likely able to get massive donations if he is indicted. He’d probably be happy about that.
[Moderating]
A reminder that we’re in FQ. The procedures for jury selection are factual and on-topic. The thread might potentially drift a bit to other procedural questions, that would still be factual. But Trump’s personal habits and attitudes towards consequences, as well as the habits and attitudes of his supporters, are topics better covered in other forums.
May we discuss the personal safety of potential jurors (I have no idea how that is handled in controversial cases)? And the ramifications of people who don’t want to serve because of fears for personal safety? Is that a legitimate excuse for being released from serving on this particular jury (assuming you don’t want to lie during voir dire)?
For example, I think I would be able to be objective about the evidence, but I would be afraid of being doxxed and perhaps my loved ones put at risk.
Standard policies and procedures for ensuring juror safety would be factual questions. Whether fears for juror safety are reasonable here, or what effect that might have on jury selection, are not.
As I understand, the lawyers (defense as well as prosecutors) maybe know the names and backgrounds of the jurors, but passing that information on to others who have no business to know it would I assume fall under some form of obstruction or jury tampering? Not just disbarment but jail time is possible?
I would assume any private investigators or other citizens who are seen trying to follow or discover the identity of jurors likely will be subject to the same liability for charges? And anyone who hired them?
The trial judge can and almost certainly will take precautions to keep juror names out of the press, and prohibit video and photos being taken of their faces. The judge can also certainly prohibit counsel and others from leaks or out-of-court investigation of jurors, and sanction them if any occur. In a crazy-high-publicity case like this, I wouldn’t be surprised if some info gets out, but the jurors won’t be totally exposed.