In Trump's defamation lawsuit, the nine most important people are enigmas

Lawyers for E. Jean Carroll and Donald J. Trump, who are facing off in a civil defamation lawsuit in Manhattan, know little about the nine people considering her claim for millions of dollars in damages against the former president.

So their lawyers have left it up to the nine jurors, about whom they have only a tiny bit of information, and work on hunches and instincts to convince people who are, by design, unknowable.

The judge, Lewis A. Kaplan, ordered that jurors remain anonymous as they considered how much Mr. Trump should pay for saying that Ms. Carroll lied when she accused him of sexual abuse, for which he has already been found liable. Judge Kaplan said jurors should be identified by number only and even suggested they not share their actual names.

In a preliminary ruling, he explained his motivations, citing the possibility of influence attempts, intimidation or worse by Trump's supporters — or by the former president himself.

With the trial set to resume Thursday after a break following a juror's illness on Monday, jurors have revealed no real clues about how they see the case unfolding before them.

Normally before a trial, attorneys on both sides dig into the backgrounds of those called for jury duty, scanning their social media pages and, in a case like Carroll v. Trump, looking for clues to polarized political beliefs, Rosanna Garcia said, the CEO of Vijilent Inc., a Massachusetts-based research firm that collects public data on potential jurors for attorneys.

“You can scroll through someone's Facebook posts and see a photo of them wearing a 'Make America Great Again' hat,” she said. “Then you don't even have to ask questions. You know where they stand.”

Eighty potential jurors were summoned for Carroll v. Trump in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, according to a court spokesperson; on Jan. 16, it took about half a day to conduct voir dire, the traditional investigation used to rule out possible bias. The selected panel consists of seven men and two women.

The trial comes less than a year after another jury in the same courthouse awarded $5 million to Ms. Carroll, 80, a former advice columnist for Elle magazine, after finding that Mr. Trump sexually assaulted her in a department store dressing room in the United States. 1990s and defamed her in a post on his Truth Social website in 2022.

Judge Kaplan ruled that these previous findings apply to the current trial, which includes separate submissions, and that Trump, 77, may not challenge Ms. Carroll's version of events in court or argue that she was a fabrication has been. her account.

The limited damages issue before the jury stems from comments Mr Trump made in June 2019, after Ms Carroll first accused him of the assault in a New York magazine article. Mr. Trump, who was still in office at the time, responded that her claim was “completely false,” that he had never met her and that she was trying to sell a book.

Ms. Carroll testified last week that her reputation has been “shattered” by Mr. Trump’s comments and his continued lashings in social media posts, on CNN, at press conferences and during the campaign trial. as recently as last week.

As jury selection took place last week, lawyers for Ms. Carroll and Mr. Trump sought to identify those they believed would be sympathetic to their client's case. But they could only judge potential jurors based on their limited answers to questions Judge Kaplan asked about their backgrounds, professions and politics.

Many of the candidate jury members indicated that they were registered with a political party, but were not asked which one. Many said they voted in the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections, but they were not asked to reveal who they voted for.

Those whose answers suggested they were more politically engaged didn't make the panel — like a retired English teacher who got her news from “Pod Save America,” a podcast hosted by former aides to former President Barack Obama, and a workplace researcher from Westchester who had attended a Trump rally.

So did a 60-year-old corporate lawyer from Manhattan who answered affirmatively when Judge Kaplan asked whether anyone thought Mr. Trump was being treated unfairly by the courts.

“I don't think many of these cases have been brought with any sense of fairness,” the lawyer said, referring to the numerous civil and criminal cases Trump faces. “The motives are suspect in my opinion.”

Some questions were more mundane. People were asked if they had ever contributed money or supported a political campaign for Mr. Trump, Mr. Obama, Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden.

“Have any of you ever read any of Mr. Trump's books?” the judge asked. “No affirmative answer,” he noted.

How about books or columns by Ms. Carroll? he continued.

“I've read her column a few times,” one woman responded.

“Would that affect your ability to be fair to both parties in this case?” Judge Kaplan asked.

“No,” said the woman.

“Has anyone ever seen 'The Apprentice'?” the judge asked. A handful indicated yes.

Jurors ultimately included a retired New York City Transit Authority track supervisor, a property manager, an emergency room doctor, a publicist and five other New Yorkers.

A majority said they were from Manhattan, the Bronx and Westchester County. Not everyone gave their age, but among those who did, ages ranged from 26 to 60.

In court, the jury was difficult to read. Jurors have kept their verdicts largely blank and focused on testimony and note-taking.

A male juror smiled when the title of one of Ms. Carroll's books: “What Do We Need Men For?” was said out loud in the courtroom.

The same juror chuckled after Ms. Carroll's lawyers posted a message on X with a photo of her smiling next to an image of the Crypt-Keeper, a declining comic book and television character. “I want to emphasize that I'm on the left,” Mrs. Carroll remarked facetiously.

It was a light moment amid difficult testimony from Ms. Carroll about the flood of often cruel social media messages and emails in her inbox, some of which included threats to kill or rape her.

As Ms. Carroll described the fear she felt as she read the messages, the judges looked solemn and attentive; Mr. Trump shook his head and sometimes scoffed.

Kate Christobek reporting contributed.