Straight from the source tonight. Please be seated. The 12 new yorkers decide the fate of a former president of the United States. Now criminal defendant, a Roller Coaster day in court ends with a jury of his peers now picked in the case of the people of the state of new york vs donald j. Trump. What weve learned tonight with Opening Statements as soon as monday also, why prosecutors or refusing to tell the defense who their first witness these are the judge appearing to agree that the former president s simply cant be trusted for certain to contain himself. And the kennedys versus a kennedy six of rf okay. Juniors, old siblings, very publicly snubbed their brother and endorsed joe biden for reelection. My source tonight is rfk junior sister, kerry kennedy. Is it a family feud . Or just plain politics . Im john king and for kaitlan collins, this is the source a rough start but then rapid progress on day three, rough because two jurors previously seated in Donald Trumps historic Hush Money Trial were stunningly dismissed. A new York Criminal Court quickly though, made up for lost time, not only filling those two law seats but also picking five more jurors to round out the full panel of 12, seven menn, and five women. One also nurture, also selected before the court wrapped for the day the search goes on for more jurors tomorrow. We dont know all the specifics about why those two jurors were excused. One, though, did raise concerns that part of her identity was being shared publicly prosecutors race concerned about the other juror, the judge did not make public the ultimate reason for letting him go. What we do know is that trump made it through the whole process today without getting scolded by the judge like he did on tuesday for monitoring allowed and potentially intimidating some of those jurors he was said to be in gross with the process today, creating his neck at times to get a good view of those seated in the jury box as they gave their answers when he left the courtroom, an attempt to sway a different jury voters all day on a trial that really is a very unfair child stories from legal experts is wall street journal editorial. But all of these are stewards legal Action Sitting have this is not a case spread across the Rubicon Indicting Trump on that says the lopping out foreign age and trumps indictment the whole world is watching. This helps he brought props today, an arm full of papers, articles, he claims back up his arguments that the cases week or worse that actually went on and on and on for a couple of minutes. He complained. Yes, he complained about the temperature in the courtroom and also about the trial taking him off the Campaign Trail but according to him, all his legal troubles are actually helping his campaign time, of course will tell us about that first. Donald j. Trump has to get through the trial, allowed to take apart on day three. We also just heard for the first time from one of those two jurors dismissed today after being sworn in, will tell you, i prosecutors wont be sharing. Their list or first witnesses with the trump team with the blessing so far, at least of the judge. But first, lets get right to some of our best legal sources are cnn anchor, chief legal analyst laura coates, cnn legal analyst and criminal defense attorney, joey jackson attorney were not itll still beale and veteran new york Trial Attorney arthur aye. Dala laura, lets begin with you. First big picture, then well get into some of the specific what stands out to you about the jury. We now have 2127 men, five women, plus the one alternate more to come. But what stands out to you about this juror . The breadth of what their experiences are. Some dont have social media, others have been bell verse and reading the art of the deal and also find him in some way intriguing, but others are from different states hey, its not native new yorkers. Others are from different countries. Youve got really the gamut of the cultural melting pot that is new york, which really makes you wonder who is going to be either the wildcard or the blank slate. You can actually persuade thats going to be where the jurors are going to have the most impact for, these particular attorneys why well, because this is whats interesting to me is that this is a very sophisticated juror. You have two lawyers, you have people in finance, obviously both sides wanted people that had some education, some sophistication because theyre complicated Financial Issues here. There are complicated legal issues here. So its going to were very interested to see how this plays out. Lets walk through some of it. New juror two and investment banker. He says he did read the art of the deal. New juror for a Security Engineer whos married, three kids, Der Eight Retired wealth manager whos married with two kids, der nine, a Speech Therapist with a masters degree. Shes not married, lives alone. Juror ten works in ecommerce as he doesnt really follow the news juror left evan, who will talk more about in a minute, worse for an apparel company, shes unmarried, doesnt have kids. The final jurors seated, physical therapist, she has a doctorate degree, says she reads the New York Times usa today, and cnn. If youre the defense team from, what i just went through and what their hearing is there asked these questions in court which reminded tonight. So big picture what i do not like are the attorneys on the jury, period generally speaking, we excuse attorneys right away yeah. It is not going lawyers right away. It used to be the law and fact that lorries clinton serve. And the reason i dont like that is because part of i think the argument here is what we call as laura is jury nullification. What does that mean in english . This is a system thats run a muck. We shouldnt be here. What are we doing . This is the weaponization of the prosecution. I dont think that thats falls really well on attorney hes i think us lawyers. Right . I think we are trained to evaluate facts to look at issues, and i just dont like right. We have varying opinions about that, but im concerned about that. Come in, arthur, but i want to ask you firstly to get more specific about. I said wed come back to one of the jurors. This is the questioning of juror 11, both teams were done with their strikes. You the chance that fans can stand up and say, gotta go, you get ten opportunity sade. Dont have to explain your reason. That person has to go get ten of those. They were done with those. Heres what the questioning of juror 11. Juror i dont like his persona. Shes talking about donald trump. I dont like some i dont like some of my coworkers, but i dont try to sabotage their work. He just seems very selfish and selfserving trump lawyer s sounds like youre saying you dont like him. The juror said, yes that person is down on the jury. The judge said he was convinced, despite what her opinion is, she could be fair and impartial. Youre shaking your head. That thats where a judge plays such a pivotal role because youre correct about the peremptory challenges, but theres also four cause challenges thats not a reason to say, judge, you cant put this person on the jury. Shes basically telling you shows like this guy. If if that happened in any other case, in any other case, any of judge would say yeah. Okay. She knows mr. Jackson because he was the coach of the kids Baseball Team and you didnt put an axon and so she doesnt like he would be off the jury. Thats that annoys me. That bothers me. And thats not cool and i can see the Jury Consultant person, but its not any other case. Youre not going to find 12 people who dont know about. You like to say that . I really dont have but opinion. Theres people who dont know social media is people dont follow the news. You got a woman hears is i dont like the guy more people left. Well, i might not my cup of tea but you heard the judge and cases, you know, that judges will try to rehabilitate in a sense, the jury because they know theyve got a finite number of people who are going to perform hundreds of people for your correct. But the same token, if the judge has all right. Knowing that can you put that aside . Now, i agree. If i were defense council, that would not make me comfortable, but the judge essentially knowing what weve had very little secret in jury selection. A lot of it is selfdisclosure and the honor system, right . Yeah. You know what youre i could put all of that aside now its up to your gut check and intuition to do so, back to your point though. One reason you dont want to have lawyers on the panel as well as because the prosecution and defense, they want to be the ones that youre relying on. Most jurors are gonna look to the lawyers on the panel and turn and go wait a second. Is that right . You think about that, right . So so whats the conversation with the defense team . If youre advising them and they have a juror that theyre nervous about. Well, that char is going to be there when we start on monday or tuesday, that term is going to be there when you have opening arguments, we start bringing up your witnesses what are you looking for and how do you think okay. We know we know the person at least started with an unfavorable opinion of our client. How do we fix it . Well, theyre going to be focused on juror number 11, or youre gonna be watching that persons social it will media is that person going to maybe violate the judges orders, which jurors do, even in not so high profile cases. Is there something that they didnt disclose that you can come back to the court and say, you know what, judge, she should have been honest or that about this this person wasnt they have to go, but john, one quick point. We should point it out is that she also gave the indication that there are oh, workers that i dont like either, but i dont take things out on them. So we talk about rehabilitation. She indicated that she still could be fair notwithstanding her not liking. Look, challenge for cause, potentially could have been granted, but i think the rehabilitation keeps her on the jury. I think the judge made a judgment call, but which is well within his discretion, by the way, the likeability if thats with this case is coming down to you. You dont have likable witnesses as well. This is not a case where youve got Mother Teresa and Mother Teresas clone and then her other clone you have the prosecution already fronting in this case. Hey, theyre gonna be people here that might have a past or a personality that you do not like. Can you see beyond that if we prove our burden . And that could be the case. Well, we began the day. Look like were going in the wrong direction, they made progress later, but at the beginning to jurors who had previously been cedar were dismissed. One was a woman who came in, essentially told the judge people push to her social media, family and friends that her identity had been exposed or at least nearly exposed by Media Coverage and the like what do you make us one Something Like that, havent and the judge said, weve lost a good juror here. Yeah, its its its been made a problem and the press was pointed out as being a source of that issue. I now of course, cnn has gone to Great Lengths to ensure that we are able to both preserve the opportunity for the public to understand the case and know about it and balanced against the anonymity reasons. But theres also a thing called prior restraint i know the judge wants to be able to say youve got to be very cautious about what you disclosed because i have a jury and a trial. We also one thing that you cant necessarily tell the press. You cannot publish something in advance. Its Public Knowledge information, but its always been viewed as balancing test between what you can say in the Public Square and also preserving the right To A Fair Trial and that includes a jury who doesnt feel intimidated. The second juror who was sent home a santos by the judge after prosecutors raised concerns that he was not honest, did not disclose during the Questioning Process that 30, 70 thank was 33, 30 plus years ago, it had a conviction for tearing down political science. And he gave an interview that juror gave an interview with usa tonights i saying he was surprised he was dismissed. He called mug shot a cowardly judge for lying. The problem prosecution to bring up in a restroom decade ago, he said, quote, i thought it was just an excuse for prosecutors to get them off the jury. I call merchant coward surprise to you. Would you have done that . Would you have stet stood up and said, wait, number one, even tell the truth. Number two taking it out political science, most of them are republican apparently 30 years ago. Whats thats the issue. The issue is the dishonest do not being candid. I mean, thats not something you forget to disclose. So believe me, this is not over both sides and particularly the defense are going to continue to look into these jurors backgrounds to see if theres anything else that they forgot to disclose and dont overlook the alternate were going into the ultimate its tomorrow. I predict not all of these jurors are going to make it through several week trial. The alternate are going to be absolutely critical here. So tastes hasnt started yet, but from the, from day one and 11, pretrial stuff, youre making notes. If youre the defense team in case donald trump is convicted, what might we appeal first, i want to hear no, i already got them rattled off first thing has to do with the sandoval issues, so they wanted they were too late and bringing up, these are the things we want to talk to donald trump about if he you gotta do that before the Lawyers Dot Questioning the jurors. So they have the opportunity to question the jurys about that number one. Number two, that should have been filed under seal, so it doesnt taint the whole jury pool in Avi Weinstein case. We did it for months its at a time under seal with a sealed courtroom when we had the hearing. So those are the first two things. The third thing im doing is youre honors or the appellate division. You had a juror who what they asked for cause. She said she doesnt like this guy. She doesnt like this guy and they still sat them when there was 500 people outside. I want to i want to reversal well, on that as well. And im giving up on juror 11. Im just saying okay. Mr. Trump, when were not kidding liquid earlier, were getting a hung jury at best. And so lets focus on the three or four people who are going to say no, no, no, were not convicted this guy and go to joes point and go with the jury nullification, tell the jury is dead, justice, and you decide that this case is bs Michael Cohen is bs so my daniels is be as and come back and say not guilty. So were in what ill call a final stretch before the opening act, if you will, you have to finish up the jury got 12 jurors seated, one alternate selected. We still need five alternates. Opening arguments could come could come as early as monday. So if youre the jurors, i mean, if youre the attorneys, your double busy tonight because you still have to focus on this important part. One of one or two of those but its could end up in the room at the end of the day, but youre also thinking, whoa, we gotta be ready for monday. What next . Were getting ready includes knowing by audience and the audience and how youre going to craft your Opening Statements and opening arguments and how you might want to tailor the presentation of evidence according to whos there. Theres a reason you want to have as much information as possible about who is in front of you because there might be when its little easter eggs have sort where youre going to try to appeal to particular juror without coming out, right. And looking at me in saying you, im talking to you and you and i say this point thats gonna be part of it, but also this is not a cake walk, sort of case. They have got to meet their burden to the prosecution, cant go in there and think to themselves, hey, a lot of people notice they might know the players here. My work is really weve done now the work begins in many ways because people are familiar with at least the players in this back could work against you because as much as they formed an opinion about trump they likely have one about stormy daniels, the likely have one about Michael Cohen. In fact, one says he follows him on twitter and hes on the case. Oh, sorry. X. X. So this is first a legal question, but its also a political question. Its a question about how judge are sean is proceeding quick briefly. All right. Weve got through various selection. They tell what the hiccups today says. We want to start as early as monday. It says he wont give them tuesday off the trump team wanted that passover is monday night into 2s into tuesday. He said no were going to proceed. So from is that his style from a legal standpoint, number one and number two, does this factor into it all that trump doesnt want to be here, but now he is. And now that he is in a new york courtroom, there approaches. Let this go on as long as we possibly can, because once its done, there are other trials and so hes trying, to trying to delay everything. This one he couldnt delay. Now that its started, youll want to stretch it. Yeah. I mean, look, heres the reality. The reality is is in my view, the judge is doing what he should do. I think this judge and indicating from the outset, john, that if you self identify as not being fair, im just going to remove you and i think thats sort of the retort to authorise very good point about whether someone should have been removed for cause. I think its going in the manner that it should. I think we have a jury. Its not surprising that it took this. You only have ten peremptory strikes with respect to discretionary removing people. And i think that you can potentially have a jury thats fair. Thats honorable. And that can make a decision based on the law and the fact that therell be instructed to make greg conversation tonight many more days to come. Lowercost. Joey jackson were nato and arthur. Thank you all for being here. Well, again, well continue this conversation, including ne