In a notable defamation trial in Manhattan, a juror's preference for a controversial podcast became a focal point of contention.

A request to remove a juror who favored the Timcast IRL podcast, hosted by Tim Pool, marked a significant moment in the defamation case against Donald Trump, which led to an $83 million judgment against the former president, as the Post Millennial reports.

Origins of the Defamation Case

The lawsuit was filed by E. Jean Carroll, who accused Donald Trump of defamation linked to an alleged sexual assault. The trial took place in Manhattan, a critical setting given the political and media spotlight.

During jury selection, Roberta Kaplan, Carroll's attorney, raised concerns about one juror's news consumption habits.

This juror, unnamed in the proceedings, was reported to be a regular listener of Timcast IRL, a podcast known for its right-wing perspectives.

Juror's News Source Sparks Controversy

The concern arose when Kaplan misunderstood the juror's preferred news source, initially thinking he referred to "the temple." This misunderstanding was clarified during the vetting process, revealing the actual source was Timcast IRL.

Tim Pool, the host of the podcast, has been described by critics as promoting right-wing views and conspiracy theories.

Upon learning of the juror's media preference, Kaplan urgently sought his removal, fearing potential bias.

Legal Challenge to Juror's Inclusion

Roberta Kaplan approached Judge Lewis Kaplan to argue for the juror's dismissal from the trial. Her concern was that the juror's biases could influence the trial's outcome unfairly.

"I was like, 'Oh, I don't know maybe he's an Orthodox Jew or something.' I couldn't figure it out. It turns out he got his news from a podcaster by the name of Tim Pool who's an incredibly right-wing, conspiratorial, conservative incel guy," Kaplan recounted.

However, Judge Kaplan denied the motion, citing the timing of the request as too late to justify a change in the jury composition.

Jury Composition and Verdict

The jury, comprising individuals mostly from regions outside of New York City, delivered a unanimous verdict. None of the jurors were from Manhattan or The Bronx, areas typically perceived as more liberal.

"So the first trial on behalf of E. Jean Carroll - both cases we had a jury of nine - the first jury, there was no one from New York City. This takes place in lower Manhattan, with no one from either Manhattan or The Bronx. I think a couple from Westchester and all the other jurors were north of Westchester, so this is Trump country," Kaplan explained.

This demographic makeup of the jury was significant, as it reflected a diverse range of political and social perspectives, potentially influencing the case's outcome.

The Outcome of the Trial

The trial concluded with the jury finding Donald Trump liable for defamation against E. Jean Carroll, culminating in a substantial financial judgment.

The former president was ordered to pay $83 million in damages, a landmark decision in a highly publicized case.

Roberta Kaplan commented on the challenge of dealing with unexpected jury compositions, emphasizing the randomness and finality of such selections.

In conclusion, the defamation trial between E. Jean Carroll and Donald Trump was marked by intense scrutiny over a juror's news preferences, raising questions about media influence and bias in legal proceedings. Despite the attempt to remove a potentially biased juror, the trial proceeded with him in place, resulting in a significant verdict against the former president.