New Trial Denied on Appeal: Jurors Found Not Credible and Designated Alternates

The Ohio Court of Appeals declined to grant the defendant a new trial wherein it was alleged that a discussion about the case during a break between 2 jurors was overheard by a public defender not involved in the trial.  The judge and counsel interviewed the 2 jurors, but the court declined the defense's request to interview all jurors.  The judge determined that the jurors were not credible so they were designated as alternates.  Thus, they did not participate in deliberations.  In my experience most judges advise the lawyers prior to the beginning of the trial who will be the alternates, for example, the last 2 jurors seated by not stricken or excused.  Seems unusual for the judge to decide during the trial who will be the alternates.  https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/11/2022/2022-Ohio-433.pdf