Is an odd turn of events in the Special Grand Jury probe into former President Trump in Georgia, one jury person has spoken out. Not only is this person a jury member, she is the foreperson. Emily Kohrs, a 30-year-old woman, has spoken out in a media tour, of sorts. Tuesday’s media tour left more questions than answers as the Georgia Grand Jury’s tenure ends.
Who is Emily Kohrs?
The Special Grand Jury Foreperson described herself as being between customer service jobs, and non-political as she didn’t vote in the 2020 presidential election. Though her statements through a short media tour Wednesday could paint an interestingly different picture of Kohrs and her angle.
Her media tour:
Tuesday Kohrs participated in what is now being called an “odd 15-minute PR tour,” with many suggesting she was just looking for her fifteen minutes of fame. Her identity was first revealed by The AP which was her first press stop. Following AP she did interviews with The New York Times, NBC News, the Atlanta Journal-Consititution, and CNN.
Many spoke out afterwords on their concerns about what this could mean for the case. Some even worry that this could contaminate the entirety of the jury pool.
Though in an odd twist, Georgia treats juries differently than any other state. Under Federal Law, Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the grand jurors, the prosecutor, and the court reporter “must not disclose a matter occurring before a grand jury.” This means that the jury can’t discuss their decisions, the identities of the witnesses who appear in the case, the documents or other items in the case, the subjects of subpoenas, or anything that occurs in the grand jury room. But Georgia doesn’t follow these rules. Their ONLY requirement for jurors is to protect the secrecy of deliberations. The Judge in this case also DID NOT prohibit members of the jury from speaking to the media.
These revelations bring many questions about the legitimacy of the case to the forefront of the discussion. How can a case be legitimate and lawful if a court acts in unlawful ways? But it doesn’t stop there according to revelations Kohrs shared with the media.
What was going on during the trial?
Emily Kohrs, without revealing any decisions, left little to be imagined based on the case and what the final verdicts may be. Here is a list of things she mentioned while giving interviews,
- She revealed the names of those who testified. Even giving her opinion on some. She said Rudy Giuliani left her starstruck, Senator Lindsey Graham was personable, and that former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows shared very little.
- She said some witnesses were immunized.
- She confirmed the jurors had listened to Trump’s phone call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger.
- She even hinted Trump might be one of the names on the recommended indictment list.
Khors also revealed more personal details about the trial and the experience the jury had while participating in the trial.
- She mentioned she swore in one witness, who according to Daniel Bostic and Donald Trump Jr. was David Ralston, while holding a Ninja Turtle ice pop…that she had received at the District Attorney’s office ice cream party.
- She also revealed that if you were in the room when witnesses had invoked their fifth amendment rights you could hear jurors “writing furiously” which could mean the jurors were improperly holding the assertion of a constitutional right against witnesses.
- Kohrs also said one juror would bring a newspaper into the room every day and point out stories about the investigation.
Assumptions and takeaways about the court based on her claims:
Kohrs’ claims are worrisome for several reasons. To start, her claims paint a picture of what the courtroom looked like, how it felt, and how those inside of it acted. The decorum the jurors held in a GRAND JURY TRIAL AGAINST A PRESIDENT is appalling. And that is just the start of the takeaways.
Seems totally normal that the lead juror in the DA’s hand picked grand jury would be hanging out with them and throwing ice cream parties… nothing fishy here at all folks just the communist… um, I mean American, justice system hard at work. pic.twitter.com/WngMa4f3qd
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) February 23, 2023
Although she did not reveal the names of the people the jury recommended indictments for basically mentioning everything else. She talked about interactions within the courtroom. She mentioned her impressions of witnesses. She even gave a look into how that courtroom felt.
One of the biggest standouts was the fact that in her descriptions of herself, she mentioned she didn’t vote in 2020 – yet when giving her impressions of witnesses she said she was star-struck by Rudy Giuliani. Interesting. It seems by mentioning she didn’t vote in 2020 she was trying to establish she wasn’t “political” or at least politically involved during 2020, the time period the case was observed, yet she was starstruck by a political figure who might not be recognizable to a non-politically involved 30-year-old.
What was Kohrs’ motive?
Kohrs is an interesting character, who seemed like she was inciting attention by appearing in the string of interviews. The way she conducted herself, the way she was teasing answers, and the way she acted while giving her interviews. It was an odd string of interviews Tuesday, that left a lot to be questioned. And as time moves forward, we will see how the court handles her media tour. We will also see how the case ends.
Could she be pro-Trump? It is hard to say. She seemed to be hinting at the jurors recommendation of Trump’s possible indictment – could it have been for attention, and attention only? Potentially. The vibes this woman gave the world through these interviews are those of someone who wanted their 15 minutes in the spotlight. And could that mean going against your own opinions? Yes, and it wouldn’t be the first time it’s happened.