Judge Juan Merchan has recessed court for the day.

Proceedings will resume tomorrow with plans to choose the remaining alternates for the jury.

Prosecutors are keeping their cards close to vest regarding who the first witnesses called at trial will be.

When defense attorney Todd Blanche requested the names of the first three state witnesses, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass declined to provide the name of the first planned witnesses following opening statements.

“Mr. Trump has been tweeting about the witnesses,” Steinglass said. “We are not telling you who the witnesses are.”

Blanche attempted to ease that concern by vowing that the former president would not post about the likely witness.

“I don’t think you can make that representation,” Judge Juan Merchan said.

On a separate matter, Merchand said that if time permits tomorrow, he plans to hold a planned hearing on the bounds of Trump’s cross-examination if he opts to testify.

Judge Merchan indicated that his goal is to have opening statements in the trial begin on Monday morning.

“We can't start until every single one of you is here,” Merchan said to the newly sworn-in jury members, urging them to inform him if they encounter any delay.

After the jury was sworn in, former President Trump sat stone-faced at the defense table with his hands locked, staring at the jury as they left the courtroom.

Following the seven jurors chosen earlier, here is basic biographical information on the remaining five jurors, whose identities are being kept private for security reasons.

Juror No. 8 is a former wealth manager who moved to New York in the 1980s. He is originally from Lebanon.

Juror No. 9 is a speech therapist who grew up in New Jersey.

Juror No. 10 has lived in Murray Hill for six years and worked in commerce for an eyewear company.

Juror No. 11 is originally from California and works as a production development manager for a multinational apparel company.

Juror No. 12 is a physical therapist whose husband works as a coach for a professional sports team.

Former President Trump's attorney Emil Bove began his cross-examination of former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker by seeking to painting Pecker and Trump's "mutually beneficially" relationship as one that had nothing to do with the election but rather had been underway for years under a "standard operating procedure."

"Seventeen years of providing President Trump with a heads-up about potentially negative publicity?" Bove asked Pecker.

"That's correct," Pecker said.

Bove asked Pecker about the first time he ever provided Trump with information -- which Pecker testified was in the 1990s and related to a negative story about Marla Maples, Trump's ex-wife.

"Fair to say that predated the Trump Tower meeting by a long time?" Bove asked of Pecker and Trump's relationship.

"Yes," Pecker said.

"A lot of interactions?" Bove asked.

"Yes," Pecker responded.

Pecker also testified about buying and suppressing stories for other individuals, such as one for former Rep. Rahm Emanuel for $20,000.

Bove also sought to show that kind of relationship between publishers and politicians was normal, saying there was "nothing wrong about" it.

"You are aware many politicians work with the media to try to promote their image?" Bove asked.

"Yes," Pecker responded.

"That's standard operating procedure?" Bove again asked.

"Yes," Pecker said.

"And sometimes when politicians are doing that, that is to try to win elections?" Bove continued.

"Right," Pecker responded.

"Nothing wrong about that?" Bove asked.

"No," Pecker responded.