Another potential juror, Lauren del Valle, was dismissed due to strong views about Trump
Former President Trump's criminal trial in New York entered its third day
Juror Herson Cabreras was dismissed due to perceived competition between judge, prosecution and defense
Trump showed interest in Miami, real estate, and media during jury selection
Former President Donald Trump's criminal trial in New York for allegedly making hush money payments to Stormy Daniels entered its third day with significant developments. On Thursday, a full jury was finally seated after a lengthy selection process. However, not all potential jurors made it through the process unscathed.
One juror, Herson Cabreras, was dismissed after being empaneled due to what he perceived as a 'competition' between Judge Juan Merchan, the prosecution and the defense. Cabreras felt that he was in the middle of this competition and expressed his concerns to the judge.
Meanwhile, Trump's attention during jury selection seemed to be drawn towards topics related to Miami, real estate, and media. When a juror mentioned his decades in law enforcement and reading the New York Post and Daily News, Trump appeared particularly interested.
Another potential juror was dismissed due to her strong views about Trump. Social media influencer Lauren del Valle was removed from the jury pool after expressing her opinions on various topics related to the former president during questioning.
Despite these developments, the trial is set to begin with opening statements expected soon. Stay tuned for updates as this story unfolds.
Donald Trump's attention is drawn to topics related to Miami, real estate, and media during jury selection for his hush money trial.
A social media influencer was dismissed because of her strong views about Trump.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(80%)
The author describes Trump's reactions to potential jurors based on their interests and opinions. This is an example of an appeal to emotion fallacy as the author is trying to elicit an emotional response from the reader by describing Trump's reactions in a certain way. The author also mentions that some potential jurors described Trump as 'selfish and self-serving' or compared him to Silvio Berlusconi, which are opinions and not facts. These statements are examples of informal fallacies as they do not provide any logical reasoning or evidence to support the claims.
The woman described watching Fox News occasionally 'just to try to see what’s going on all sides.' Trump crossed his arms and glared at the space in front of him.
It would be a little hard for me to retain my impartiality and fairness,' the man said before being dismissed.
One man said he was born and raised in Italy and then compared Trump to Silvio Berlusconi, the late prime minister of Italy and infamous womanizer who was convicted of tax fraud in 2013.
Bias
(90%)
The author does not demonstrate any clear bias in the article. However, there are a few instances where the author describes potential jurors' opinions about Trump in a negative light. These descriptions do not constitute bias on the part of the author as they are simply reporting on the statements made by these individuals during jury selection.
born and raised in Italy and then compared Trump to Silvio Berlusconi
]it would be a little hard for me to retain my impartiality and fairness[
Juror number 4, Herson Cabreras, was dismissed from Donald Trump’s criminal hush money trial in New York after being empaneled.
Cabreras felt he was in the middle of a ‘competition’ between Judge Juan Merchan, the prosecution and the defense.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(30%)
The article contains selective reporting as the author only reports details that support Juror Number 4's narrative of being unfairly dismissed from the jury. The author does not provide any context or counter-arguments from the prosecution or defense. Additionally, there is emotional manipulation as the author uses phrases like 'cowardly judge' and 'bad taste in Cabreras’ mouth' to elicit an emotional response from readers.
They did me a favor
I feel sorry for the other jurors
The whole episode left a bad taste in Cabreras’ mouth
Fallacies
(85%)
The author makes an appeal to authority by quoting Cabreras's description of the judge as 'cowardly'. This is a fallacy because it is not up to the author to label someone as 'cowardly' based on another person's opinion.
The author labels Judge Merchan as 'cowardly' based on Cabreras's opinion.
Bias
(95%)
The author does not demonstrate any clear bias in the article. However, there are a few instances where the language used could be perceived as having a slight negative tone towards Judge Juan Merchan for allowing the prosecution to bring up Cabreras' old arrest during voir dire and dismiss him from jury duty. This could be seen as an example of monetary bias if it is assumed that the author has a financial interest in the outcome of the trial or if it is assumed that Lohud.com has a financial interest in generating clicks on their article about the trial. However, without any evidence to support these assumptions, it is not possible to definitively say that there is monetary bias present.
But Cabreras felt he could have been impartial, but his family ‘was not happy with all this.’
Juror 1 enjoys outdoor activities, gets news from The New York Times, Fox News and MSNBC.
Juror 2 works in finance and lives in Hell's Kitchen. He likes hiking, music, concerts and enjoys New York City. Follows Michael D. Cohen on social media and also follows figures like Kellyanne Conway.
Accuracy
The identities of the jurors will be kept confidential during the trial and that reporters withhold some information that could identify them.
Juror 2 follows Michael D. Cohen on social media and also follows figures like Kellyanne Conway.
