Trump and His Allies Push False Account of What the Judge Told Jurors

It was a shocking assertion for anyone with even a passing knowledge of American jurisprudence: The judge overseeing the trial of Donald J. Trump had said that jurors could individually choose from a menu of different crimes to find the former president guilty, so long as the total of votes added up to 12.

It was also untrue.

The suggestion — made in an online post by the Fox News anchor John Roberts — nonetheless found an immediate and massive audience, with some 5.7 million views on X, formerly known as Twitter. Surrogates and allies of Mr. Trump quickly amplified its arguments, as did Mr. Trump himself.

“Judge Merchan just told the jury that they do not need unanimity to convict,” Mr. Roberts wrote. “4 could agree on one crime, 4 on a different one, and the other 4 on another. He said he would treat 4-4-4 as a unanimous verdict.”

In fact, all 12 jurors must agree to find Mr. Trump guilty in order to convict him of any one of the felonies with which he has been charged: 34 counts of falsifying business records. The judge in the case, Juan M. Merchan, repeatedly made this clear, saying in his instructions to the jury: “Each count you consider, whether guilty or not guilty, must be unanimous.”

Mr. Roberts sought to clarify his post in an interview on Thursday. By then, the idea that a non-unanimous verdict was possible had been spread by the former president and presumptive Republican nominee, as well as by his supporters.

The manner in which Mr. Trump and his allies seized on Mr. Roberts’s post reflects a right-wing media ecosystem that has been fine-tuned to create and circulate disinformation that can harm Democrats and boost political favorites, a cycle that has already been active during Mr. Trump’s trial. That process has included sustained attacks on institutions long considered both impartial and resistant to politics, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Justice and the courts.