GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. — A juror accused of harboring a bias against two men convicted Tuesday of plotting to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer was allowed to stay on the case because the juror did not appear to be manipulative and denied having a predetermined desire to convict the men, according to an unsealed court filing.
The filing sheds light on an allegation of juror misconduct that threatened to upend one of the largest domestic terrorism cases in a generation. The allegation is expected to factor into appeals after Potterville resident Adam Fox and co-defendant Barry Croft of Delaware were convicted earlier Tuesday of kidnapping and weapons of mass destruction conspiracy charges.
The allegation emerged publicly Aug. 11 during the trial's early stages. That's when Fox's lawyer Joshua Blanchard relayed a tip about one of the jurors.
Blanchard had been contacted by the juror's coworker about comments made before the juror was picked to decide the case.
"According to the report, the subject juror expressed a strong opinion about the defendants’ guilt and indicated that if chosen, he or she would make sure that the defendants were found guilty," U.S. District Judge Robert Jonker wrote in court filing.
The filing was unsealed Tuesday night, about six hours after the unanimous jury verdicts.
The juror is not identified by gender or number in the unsealed filing.
Blanchard declined comment.
In the filing, Jonker recounted an investigation conducted by his staff in private and behind the scenes of the trial.
The judge's jury clerk learned the coworker had not spoken directly with the juror or heard anything directly.
"Rather the information the reporting coworker provided had come secondhand through another coworker ... ," Jonker wrote.
The clerk could not corroborate the report because the second coworker did not want to be identified or interviewed.
"The jury clerk did confirm that the entirety of the reported information involved a time before jury selection in this case began," Jonker wrote.
The judge briefed prosecutors and defense lawyers Aug. 11 during a hearing in his chambers and away from public view. Jonker said he would question the juror privately, which sparked objections from defense lawyers.
Jonker revealed in his order that a "similar issue" arose during the first trial of alleged kidnap plotters in March. He did not elaborate about the previously undisclosed issue.
"Attorney Blanchard also expressed a concern that the subject juror was somehow manipulating the jury during trial to ensure an allegedly desired outcome," the judge wrote. "Attorney Blanchard asked that the entirety of the jury be questioned on the matter with the parties present, or that the court declare a mistrial."
Jonker refused.
He interviewed the juror Aug. 12 during a meeting attended only by court staff.
The judge's investigation did not uncover dishonesty by the juror, who denied having a bias. Jonker determined the juror's demeanor and behavior were credible.
The juror also reiterated that he or she could set aside preconceived views of the defendants and decide the case based on evidence, the judge wrote.
"The subject juror’s behavior during trial buttresses this conclusion," Jonker wrote. "Interactions with other jurors, to the extent court personnel can observe it, evince no hushed whispers or... desire to manipulate. And the juror’s behavior in the jury box is entirely inconsistent with someone who has a made a predetermined decision to find the defendants guilty."
That left Jonker with only a "double hearsay" tip, the judge wrote.
———
