Trump and his allies are pushing a fake edit of what the judge told jurors

Advertising

A tweet from a Fox News host incorrectly said the jury would not want to unanimously find the former president guilty on an indictment.

By Jesse McKinley

This is a shocking statement to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of American jurisprudence: the judgment handed down on the supervision of the trial of Donald J. Trump had said juries could decide separately from a menu of other crimes to convict the former president, as long as the total votes were 12.

This, too, is false.

However, the suggestion, made in an online article by Fox News host John Roberts, found a large following, with some 5. 7 million views to X, formerly known as Twitter. Trump’s surrogates and allies temporarily amplified their arguments, as did Trump. himself.

“Judge Merchan just told the jury that he doesn’t want unanimity to convict,” Mr. Roberts said.   Four can agree on one crime, four on another, and the other four on another. He said the four-four-four would be a unanimous verdict.

In fact, the 12 jurors will have to agree to guilt Trump in order to convict him of one of the crimes he is charged with: 34 counts of tampering with business records. Juan M. Merchán, made it clear on several occasions, in his orders to the jury: “All the charges that you are considering, guilty or not guilty, will have to be unanimous. “

Roberts tried to explain his message in an interview Thursday. By that time, the concept that a non-unanimous verdict was conceivable had spread among the former president and presumptive Republican nominee, as well as among his supporters.

The way Trump and his allies seized Roberts reflects a right-wing media ecosystem that has been subtle in creating and spreading disinformation that can hurt Democrats and bolster political favorites, a cycle that is already in place. attacks on institutions that were long independent and politically resilient, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Justice, and the courts.

We are recovering the content of the article.

Please allow javascript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience as we determine access. If you’re in player mode, log out and log in to your Times account or subscribe to the full Times.

Thank you for your patience as we determine access.

Already a subscriber?  Sign in.

Do you want all the Times?  Subscribe.

Advertising

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *