Photo: Alamy
The jurors overseeing President Trump’s “hush money” case were dismissed from the courtroom without having decided a verdict following the first day of deliberations on Wednesday.
The 12 person jury will instead reconvene on Thursday at 9:30 a.m. ET, according to a report from NCLU Communications Director Paul Ingrassia.
While a verdict could be decided as soon as Thursday, it is also possible deliberations continue into the following weeks.
Judge Juan Merchan dismissed the jury at around 4:00 p.m. ET after more than four hours of deliberations. On Thursday, the jurors will now re-hear testimony they requested today to review, along with the judge’s reciting of his instructions.
As previously reported by RSBN, the judge was given a note during deliberations, which included four requests regarding information and testimony.
The requests included tabloid publisher David Pecker’s testimony and his supposed phone call with President Trump, his testimony regarding an alleged Trump Tower meeting, and Michael Cohen’s testimony on that meeting.
Judge Merchan also instructed the jury that they did not need a “unanimous” verdict to find the president “guilty” on any of the 34 felony counts brought against him by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.
Of course, jurors may very well fail to meet a consensus, and become ultimately a hung jury.
While sitting inside the courtroom, President Trump launched a series of posts to his Truth Social, writing that Merchan’s decision to scrap having unanimity was “UNCONSTITUTIONAL” and “UNAMERICAN” in response to the “fake charges” brought by “Soros backed” Bragg.
Per RSBN, the parameters of Merchan’s decision are incredibly controversial, and the deck appears to be greatly stacked against the president.
While unanimous decisions are not technically a legal requirement in New York’s court of law, it is certainly an interesting move by the judge to levy this decision amid the divisive, partisan nature of this case.
“There is no need to agree on what has occurred. They can disagree on what the crime was among the three choices,” Fox News’ Harris Faulker said in one clip posted to X by journalist Kyle Becker.
“This means they could split 4-4-4 and the judge would still treat them unanimously,” she added.
Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andy McCarthy called the instructions “outrageous.”
McCarthy continued, “In a normal criminal case every statutory crime has what we call elements of the offense. Like in a bank robbery case you have to rob – it has to be a financial institution, you have to show intent.”
He also reiterated, “Falsification of records is normally a misdemeanor in New York. What makes it a felony is that you are concealing or committing another crime.”
“The only reason they are still able to bring this case is because it’s a felony allegedly and yet now the judge is saying you know, you don’t have to agree on what the felony is,” he concluded.