Dismissed juror says ‘no way in hell’ she can be unbiased in Trump Organization tax trial

As jury selection begins in the Manhattan tax fraud trial of Donald Trump’s real estate company, multiple potential jurors have had to be dismissed because they hate the former president so much. One potential candidate told reporters there’s “no chance in hell” she could be unbiased in the case against the Trump Organization.

“He’s guilty in my mind whatever the case is — anything he does, anything his corporation does," one potential juror, identifying herself only as a 34-year-old ad executive named Adrienne, told Insider.

"If it’s down to, can you be impartial about Donald Trump? I think it’s hard," another dismissed juror told the publication. "He’s such a polarizing person."

The second juror said she heard a third potential panel member be sent home because they said, plainly, "I hate Trump."

Jury troubles are just one element in the complex case against the Trump Organization, one of the highest-profile attempts thus far to sanction Donald Trump’s business practices.

Though the former president himself is not named in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office’s case against the Trump Organization, the suit still paints a damning picture of Mr Trump’s business.

According to prosecutors, the Trump Organization spent 15 years making “off the books” transfers to top executives in the form of car leases, rent payments, and tuition fees as a means to avoid income tax.

In August, longtime Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg pleaded guilty to 15 counts in the case, including grand larceny, tax fraud, and falsifying records in exchange for his testimony at the trial and a five-month sentence.

If his testimony confirms illegal conduct, and a jury is persuaded, the Trump Organization could face up to $1.6m in fines and limits on its role as a manager of hotels, golf courses, and other properties, a hammer blow to the Trump business empire.

Trump Organization lawyers have called the case “selective prosecution” prompted by contempt for the former president’s politics. Judge Juan Merchan, who’s in charge of the case, has dismissed that argument.

The attorneys also said that the prosecutors are working to penalise Mr Trump’s firm because “a handful of its officers allegedly failed to report fringe benefits on their personal tax returns”, according to The Guardian.

The Manhattan DA’s case is separate from a $250m suit filed last month by New York Attorney General Letitia James, which accuses the Trump Organization, Donald Trump, and three of his children of misrepresenting the former president’s assets, as well as the value of various properties, to obtain financing and insurance benefits.

Mr Trump, in a September post on his own Truth Social account, called the case a “witch hunt” and claimed Ms James is pursuing a case against him to promote her political agenda.

“I never thought this case would be brought – until I saw her really bad poll numbers,” he wrote. “She is a failed AG whose lack of talent in the fight against crime is causing record numbers of people and companies to flee New York. Bye, bye!”

According to an Independent analysis, Donald Trump and his namesake company are facing 20 major lawsuits and investigations.