No....protect their idenity at all cost.

the jurors deal with intimidation is my experience when leaving and divorcing a violent husband. He stalked me, made numerous threats to kill me, and made two attempts at it.

He ordered me to keep quiet about his violence and the threats, counting on my fear of him to silence me. Instead, I realized that he feared the consequences to him if I went public, so I told every one I knew - relatives, friends, coworkers. They helped to protect me and keep information from him about where I went and what I did.

Shedding light on intimidators sometimes is the best option.

yet I know nothing about the healthy boundaries any of these jurist have developed....so that option is rare and selective...

Still focused on protecting the jurist privacy.

is best for their safety, IF the anonymity can be maintained.

But, given the nature of the criminal in this case and the nature of the attorneys and media who are on his side, anonymity is fleeting. As soon as the Trump legal team has the names, Trump and his goons will have them. They will leak them. Count on it.

As for my "noble and brave stance," it was neither. It was simply self-preservation and intuitive instinct to turn the intimidation tables on him. With every one aware of his threats and violence, he realized that he would be the first suspect if anything happened to me.

If they convict Trump they would need around the clock protection for as least as long as Trump lives. Who would want to live like that?

the jurors and courts do?

It WILL be broken. The Trump legal team is allowed to have the names. Guaranteed, therefore, that Trump will get them. He and his goons will select the jurors that they decide are most vulnerable and will threaten them. The threats will include consequences if they report being intimidated.

Trump is a mob boss. That's how he operates.

I know the defendant has the right to object to that and get a jury trial, but what really can you do in this circumstance? Even in a city as big as NYC, the jurors can probably be identified-- an oncology nurse who is not at her job... co-workers would figure out where she is, and supervisors would know, etc.

So, no. That is simply not a possibility.

Might not always be best for society, as with the 2nd amendment, another constitutional right. Jurors shouldn't have to risk their lives.

What SHOULD happen and what CAN happen seem to be many many miles apart.

make Trump go away.

He takes every norm and convention and right and corrupts them to his own advantage, because he doesn't care what he destroys.

I am so very sick of him and his minions.

sigh...

Light is no "disinfectant" in this case, but rather enables those with malign or pathological motivations.

On that score, one thing I really love about Colorado is that knowing this, they allow voters to register as an ANONYMOUS voter such that their registrations cannot be obtained short of a court order. You have to appear in person and complete an affidavit and the expectation is that only those who face serious risk (e.g., stalking) will do so, but I was among hundreds at my own registrar's office when then Trump-aligned Kris Kolbach tried to obtain all that information for his highly questionable voter registration "study." (The latter had very few protections for the data collected which upset a number of CO voter registrars as well as the then SOS, so they took great pains to inform Colorado voters of that risk. )

the Trump legal team can get the names of jurors. Once they have them, Trump will get them, too. He will either leak the names or continue to use media like Fox to leak detailed descriptions of The jurors.

but further info is not going to come from the attorneys who are at a high enough level that disbarment REALLY is a threat for them. Trump is leaking things now, with little doubt-- but cutting off public descriptions and employment will help. So, no. The less information the better.

And it is NOT true that names will be made public after the trial. As someone who has been victimized in the past, I feel very strongly about this. Any suggestions about further identifying these potential jurors is simply anathema to me. They need to be protected to the full extent the law allows, IMO. Frankly, I think, as in the civil trial, they should have been kept fully confidential, no matter what hoops would have been required to accomplish this.

I am reminded of this sad incident that began our more critical approach to publicizing data for those who may face threats from the public, the horrific murder of actress Rebecca Schaeffer (TV show, "My Sister, Sam) in 1989.

as in the civil trial. But, unfortunately, that is not the case now in this trial.

Given what we know about how Trump operates, and about the kinds of attorneys who work for him, I am not confident that the names can remain anonymous.

I agree that media should not broadcast details about jurors, but they do and they will, with impunity.

Trump's current intimidation tactics are intended to make jurors fearful of the consequences of convicting him. I hope for their sakes that they are kept safe, and that they are able to vote according to evidence, free of, or in spite of fear.

He should be locked up at a safe base away from the proceedings but watching via zoom. It seems the intimidators need a lesson.

to be on that jury. I’d be candid saying I had already made up my mind he’s guilty and go home.