All 12 jurors finally selected in Trump hush money trial

Twelve New Yorkers have been selected to be jurors in Donald Trump’s hush money criminal trial but proceedings could still be delayed after another chaotic day in court.

Seven jurors were added on Thursday afternoon only a few hours after two people were selected and quickly excused.

Alternative jurors are still being chosen, which could delay the start of the former president’s trial.

Jurors have undergone an intensive vetting process in the selection for Mr Trump’s criminal trial – the first of any US president – in which he is charged with concealing hush money payments used to cover up an affair with an adult film star. He has pleaded not guilty and denied an affair.

Legal teams had been told to prepare for opening statements as early as Monday morning, but that timetable was thrown into doubt after one juror said she felt intimidated after being identified from reports and prosecutors suggested another may have lied about a prior arrest.

The scenes on Thursday threw into stark relief the difficulty of selecting a jury to try a former US president. Earlier on Monday, half of a new group of prospective jurors led into court asked to be excused over impartiality concerns.

Mr Trump, the presumptive Republican candidate in November’s election, has claimed it will be impossible for him to receive a fair hearing in Manhattan, a solidly-Democratic area. He has called it the “second-worst venue in the country” on his Truth Social platform.

The full jury was eventually seated on Thursday afternoon when two jurors took the place of those who were excused, followed by five more. However, the court has yet to pick any alternates who will replace jurors if they cannot continue.

One woman selected this week was excused when she raised concerns that aspects of her identity made public would affect her ability to be impartial.

She told the court that her family, friends and colleagues had contacted her after working out that she was a juror through press accounts of the trial.

“I don’t believe at this point that I can be fair and unbiased, and let the outside influences not affect my decision-making in the courtroom,” she said.

Justice Juan Merchan, the judge presiding over the proceedings, said the juror had felt intimidated by the disclosures, which included her occupation and the area where she lived.

He directed the press to avoid reporting on prospective jurors’ employment history going forward.

“We just lost what probably would have been a very good juror,” he said.

A second juror, who arrived to court late, was dismissed after prosecutors suggested he may not have disclosed prior brushes with the law on an extensive questionnaire intended to vet prospective jurors.

They noted that reporting from the 1990s referred to a man with the same name who had been arrested for tearing down political advertisements.

“I actually believe the propaganda that was being ripped down was political posters that were on the Right – the political Right,” Joshua Steinglass, prosecuting, said.

He added that they had also found that the juror’s wife was previously involved in a corruption inquiry and cooperated with the District Attorney’s office.

Lawyers from both sides, along with the judge, questioned the juror out of earshot of reporters. The man was seen talking animatedly, prompting laughter from the lawyers – although Justice Merchan looked stern.

Mr Trump, seated at the defence table, leaned in, apparently listening intently as the parties spoke in hushed voices.

Eventually, the man was told not to return to the trial and was led out of the courtroom. He told The New York Times afterwards that he should not have been dismissed.

Justice Merchan later said the juror had “expressed annoyance about how much information about him had been out in the public”.

On Thursday, prosecutor Christopher Conroy accused Mr Trump of violating a gag order imposed by the judge seven times since the trial began this week.

Mr Conroy said he had attacked the prosecution’s star witness – his former lawyer and “fixer”, Michael Cohen – branding him a “serial perjurer” on Truth Social.

In another post, Mr Trump quoted a Conservative commentator who claimed there were “undercover liberal activists lying to the judge” to get onto the jury. “This is the most disturbing post in light of what just happened this morning,” Mr Conroy said.

Prosecutors have already sought a $3,000 fine for Mr Trump for three other posts on the Truth Social platform.

Defence lawyer Emil Bove said Mr Cohen “had been attacking President Trump in public statements”, and that Mr Trump was simply replying. The judge will consider the matter next week.