(POLL) More than half wrongly predicted Trump’s NY trial would end with ‘hung jury’ verdict


Fifty-three percent (53%) of respondents said they thought the New York jury in Donald Trump’s “hush money” trial would deliver a “hung jury” or non-decision verdict.

That’s according to the latest unscientific poll at SharylAttkisson.com.

A hung jury, also sometimes called a deadlocked jury, is a judicial jury that cannot agree upon a verdict after extended deliberation and is unable to reach the required unanimity. A hung jury could result in the case being tried again or charges being dropped.

In reality, the NY jury quickly convicted Trump of all charges in the controversial trial.

It’s the first time a US presidential candidate has been prosecuted and/or convicted by the opposing political rival’s law enforcement team.

Twenty-nine percent (29%) of those polled correctly predicted that Trump would be found “guilty,” while 19% said they thought he would be found “not guilty.”

Trump was being accused of signing off on a scheme to illegally falsify records, with the goal of covering up a $130,000 “hush money” payment made by his attorney, Michael Cohen, to adult film star Stormy Daniels in 2016. Prosecutors say the scheme was designed to subvert election law and keep the payment secret.

However, Trump’s accountant had declared the expense on his taxes. Since it was made to his attorney, Trump’s bookkeeper declared it to be a legal expense. Anti-Trump prosecutors claimed it should have been declared as a campaign expense. However, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) did not prosecute.

The judge in the case barred an FEC expert from testifying on behalf of Trump. He was scheduled to explain to the jury that there was no election crime in the case.

Prosecutors in the case suspended the statute of limitations in order to prosecute the alleged crime, which had no complainant (other than Trump’s opponents), or stated victim

Multiple witnesses testified that Trump denied the sexual encounter(s) with Daniels, but wanted to spare his wife, Melania, the threat of Daniels’ public accusations.

Paying “hush money” in of itself is not a crime unless the person receiving the money blackmailed the payor or extorted.

Members of Congress have been paying hush money to alleged victims they won’t name, through a secret fund with money supplied by taxpayers.

Trump is appealing his convictions.

Full results are below. Be sure to answer the newest poll at SharylAttkisson.com. Look for the black box on the right sidebar on your computer or scroll way down on your mobile device.

Poll Question: I think the NY jury will find Trump

29% Guilty

19% Not Guilty

53% Hung Jury

Visit The Sharyl Attkisson Store today

Shop Now

Unique gifts for independent thinkers

Proceeds benefit independent journalism


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

8 thoughts on “(POLL) More than half wrongly predicted Trump’s NY trial would end with ‘hung jury’ verdict”

  1. Were jurors afraid of the retaliation they might face in the event of a not guilty verdict or hung jury?

  2. “(POLL) More than half wrongly predicted Trump’s NY trial would end with ‘hung jury’ verdict”

    That title could just as easily be “Most have no clue about how corrupt the NYC justice system is.”

  3. No. We weren’t wrong. The judge changed the rules about agreeing on a verdict. Get your headline straight. The judge was wrong, not the people taking your survey. This headline is beneath you, Sharyl.

  4. Jeffrey Lawrence Olson

    I just had trouble believing that 12 people could be that stupid or prejudiced to accept such a laughably obvious case of political persecution – even in New York. Apparently, I was wrong.

  5. Jeffery Wayne Tartt

    Unfortunately, many Americans still believe in our judicial systems. They still believe America is just…it’s not. Maybe I’m wrong but right now. Do you still feel the same way you did ten years ago about the greatest country in the world you grew up in? I know I don’t. I feel grifted, lied to, taken advantage of, cheated, foolish and sad. Like I said, maybe I’m wrong to feel that way…but I do and I truly wish I didn’t.

  6. I was once wrongfully convicted of a crime by a crooked judge, It wasn’t a serious crime and I wasn’t sentenced to serve any time, and the conviction was overturned on an appeal that also got the crooked judge/friend of the complainant thrown off the bench by the state supreme court.

    But none of that changes the fact that the arrest and conviction happened or the negative publicity that happened as a result.

    Wrongful convictions overturned should come with an automatic award of a million dollars due to the never-ending impact on one’s life and one’s reputation.

  7. I would challenge any of those “slight majority” as well as the 12 jurors, DA Bragg and Judge Marchan to tell the nation exactly what was the felony crime?
    Was NOT a campaign violation since the money was Trump’s to spend as he decides.
    It was not ‘hush money’ to interfere with the election since it could just as easily been claimed to keep the affair, if there was one; from hurting his wife and family!
    Even if he wrote legal expenses on the checks, the money was paid to his lawyer.

    The charges, the indictment and the conviction was a sham and pure political persecution,

  8. Challenge accepted:
    “Was NOT a campaign violation since the money was Trump’s to spend as he decides” – That’s not the way election law works. It was Trump’s money to spend, but it has to be declared as a campaign expense. He didn’t do that.
    “It was not ‘hush money’ to interfere with the election since it could just as easily been claimed to keep the affair, if there was one; from hurting his wife and family! – That was Trump’s defense and the jury didn’t buy it, probably because of testimony that Trump was trying to put off paying Daniels until after the election because then it wouldn’t matter to him. Trump is hardly the first defendant to claim a different story than the prosecution, and he’s hardly the first defendant that the jury didn’t believe.
    “Even if he wrote legal expenses on the checks, the money was paid to his lawyer” – I’m not sure that I understand this because it implies that I could, for example, pay my lawyer to burn down a competitor’s business and as long as I wrote “legal expenses” on the check when I paid him off, I would be in the clear. The point is that, no matter what he wrote on the checks, the payments to Cohen were not for legal expenses. They were to reimburse him for his payments to Daniels.
    “what was the felony crime” – He was convicted to (at least) two crimes. The first one was falsifying business records. The second one was one (or more) of the following: violation of federal campaign finance laws, falsification of other business records or a violation of tax laws.
    “The charges, the indictment and the conviction was a sham and pure political persecution” – Everyone is entitled, of course, to their own opinion, but after the testimony I believe you’d have to be willfully blind to the facts to believe that Trump didn’t do what he was charged with (I mean if they were simply legitimate legal expenses, why would they gross them up as they did?). So the conviction was hardly a sham. Were there politics involved in deciding to charge Trump? That is a definite possibility. But let’s not lose sight of these important points:
    1) Trump was afforded the same rights as every other defendant
    2) The overwhelming preponderance of the evidence showed that Trump did what he was charged with
    3) Knowing that Trump committed this crime (which arguably helped him win the 2016 election) the choice not to prosecute him would have meant that he was above the law.
    And, of course, Trump has the right to appeal his conviction. And if the judge made some legal error, and a new trial is ordered, then he’ll get a new trial. That the way the system works.

Scroll to Top