859

“We need to identify each juror. Then make them miserable. Maybe even suicidal,” wrote another user on the same forum. “1,000,000 men (armed) need to go to washington and hang everyone. That’s the only solution,” wrote another user. “This s--- is out of control.”

“I hope every juror is doxxed and they pay for what they have done,” another user wrote on Trump’s Truth Social platform Thursday. “May God strike them dead. We will on November 5th and they will pay!”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago

Looking at a few different NYC election results, about 25% of the population votes republican. Meaning statically 3 of the jurors should be republican. I am sure it could get more granular when you cross that with their occupations.

[-] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 17 points 2 years ago

Yeah but it's not a purely random sample, because of the jury selection process.

So we can't really say anything in a statistical sense. I'd guess (not based on any statistics, just common sense) that there would be a higher percentage of independents in the jury than there would be in the general population. At any rate they would people that likely don't think about politics very much. With Trump, if someone is politically minded at all they'd have a strong opinion on Trump (one way or the other) and would be likely disqualified from being on the jury.

Anyway the point of jury selection is to not be a random sample, but a group of people that aren't biased for or against the defendant. The polling on the general populace doesn't have the requirement to not be politically biased to participate, so we can't use statistics for this.

Sorry for being being that guy, but proper use of statistics is important to me! Sorry!

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Selection process is random but the challenge process keeps it white noise. They're each going to throw away a set number of people that are bad for their side. In the end it ends up being kind of random still anyway.

[-] Melody@lemmy.one 1 points 2 years ago

Is it still likely that there is at least one republican? I think it is possible.

All it would take is one allied republican on the jury to potentially leak juror identities.

[-] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago

The trial was in Manhattan, so that rules out Staten Island. Manhattan alone only voted 14.5% ^[1] for Trump in 2020. Also 55% of registered voters cast ballots in all of New York City in 2020 ^[1] (idk what the actual number is for Manhattan specifically).

So about 7.97% of everyone eligible to vote in Manhattan voted for Trump in 2020. This is about 1/12. There's likely more probability math to perform, but maybe one Republican voter was in the Jury, but it's also likely that none of the jury had ever voted for Trump (despite what they said in jury selection). 3 republicans in the Jury seems high although I'm also too high to do the math.

^[1] https://www.gothamgazette.com/city/9961-breaking-down-2020-vote-new-york-city-biden-trump

this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2024
859 points (98.4% liked)

News

36453 readers
658 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS