Around 100 potential jurors cleared initial screening ahead of the trial of former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters.
Peters faces 10 counts related to her time as clerk. In 2021 she was alleged to have allowed unauthorized access to Mesa County’s voting machines in an attempt to prove election fraud. The charges include attempts to influence a public servant, identity theft and official misconduct.
On Monday, potential jurors were asked to complete a questionnaire that was reviewed by attorneys for the prosecution and defense. Over several hours Tuesday, attorneys made their case for either excluding or including certain jurors based on their answers.
Jurors may be excused for any number of reasons, including health concerns or personal matters. Still, individual cases were discussed at length, as each side dissected respondents’ answers to questions about trust in government, bias toward or against Peters and their readership habits of the local paper of record, which has covered the case in minute detail for the past three years.
Peters’ defense team repeatedly argued that jurors who had been following the case through the media should be excused from the pool. Attorney Dan Hartman went so far as to say that recent articles in the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel could amount to “jury tampering” and that sequestration may be required.
“If the press won’t behave — and you can’t muzzle the press — you may have to conceal the jury,” Hartman told 21st Judicial District Judge Matthew Barrett.
On Sunday, the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel published a report on the trial that included an editor’s note advising any readers who were scheduled for jury duty to skip the story.
Many of the objections raised by Hartman for specific jurors were overruled as Barrett noted that simply knowing about the case did not amount to bias. Barrett overruled some bias objections for both the prosecution and defense, saying that a juror having an opinion ahead of being informed on the facts of the case did not constitute grounds for dismissal.
Janet Drake, deputy attorney general, pointed to a handful of concerns for the prosecution, including respondents who said they were distrustful of the FBI, the state government or Dominion Voting Systems — the vendor who supplied the equipment that Peters has said she was helping investigate when she allegedly broke the law. At least one potential juror was dismissed for having donated to Peters.
Dozens of prospective jurors were dismissed, many with the consensus of both the defense and prosecution. Barrett said the court had the option to pull from more jurors reporting later in the week if needed, but he felt they had a sufficient jury pool for now.
“There’s a lot of people in this batch here who appear to have no idea about this case,” he said.
The court was interrupted once by a member of the audience, who interjected while 21st Judicial District Attorney Dan Rubinstein was speaking. Barrett said the jury questionnaire process was also interrupted earlier in the week and warned against further distractions.
“If there is another outburst, you will be gone, or worse,” Barrett said.
The final phase of the jury selection process is set to begin Wednesday morning.
