Examples:

• • Defendant Abdiaziz Farah allegedly claimed to serve over 3.5 million meals at his Feeding Our Future site in 2021, averaging over 12,000 children fed per day.
  • Federal agents raided multiple sites in January 2022, seizing over $6 million in cash, luxury vehicles including a Porsche and Range Rover, and over 45 properties.
  • Feeding Our Future founder Aimee Bock, accused of overseeing the scheme, allegedly received kickbacks including a $600,000 house and new Audi.
  • Defendant Guhaad Said allegedly told others how to successfully defraud the child nutrition program, calling it “free money.”
  • Fraudulent meal reimbursements allegedly funded everything from college tuition and bank loans to cosmetic surgery and international travel.

How the Scheme Worked:

• • Feeding Our Future recruited entities to open USDA Child Nutrition Program sites across MN to supposedly serve meals to needy children.
  • Site operators submitted fraudulent meal count sheets to Feeding Our Future, claiming far more children served than reality.
  • Feeding Our Future used those inflated meal counts to obtain huge sums in federal reimbursements from the MN Department of Education.
  • Money passed through Feeding Our Future to site operators, who kicked back portions to Feeding Our Future employees and spent the rest on personal luxuries.
  • Covid waivers allowed claiming meals for kids not on site, which defendants allegedly exploited to inflate meal counts and reduce oversight.

FAQs:

• • What tipped off regulators to the fraud? The huge spike in claimed reimbursements by Feeding Our Future during the pandemic eventually raised red flags for auditors who noted the meal numbers seemed impossibly high.
  • Did all the defendants work directly for Feeding our Future? No, the defendants included Feeding Our Future employees but also many operators of sites opened under its sponsorship who allegedly participated in the fraud scheme.
  • How much of the money has been recovered? To date, federal agents have seized about $50 million worth of cash and property traceable to the alleged fraud.
  • Why did it take so long to uncover with that much money involved? Covid waivers reduced oversight of the child nutrition programs to get aid out quicker, which officials say created more opportunities for fraud.
  • What happens to Feeding Our Future now? Feeding Our Future had its authorization as a child nutrition program sponsor revoked and appears to no longer be operating.

Examples:

• • The juror was not home at the time of the attempted bribe, but the door was answered by a relative. The woman gave the relative a gift bag containing the cash and instructions for the juror.
  • When the juror returned home, the relative informed them about the suspicious bag of money and instructions. The juror looked inside, saw the large sum of cash, and called 911.
  • A second juror was excused after reporting they overheard the bribed juror on the phone discussing the incident with a family member, against court instructions not to discuss the case.
  • The judge replaced the two dismissed jurors with alternates before sending the newly constituted jury to deliberate. Jurors had to leave their phones and laptops behind.
  • FBI agents searched one defendant’s home the next morning but have not revealed what, if any, evidence was recovered. No arrests have been made yet in the bribery attempt.

What Happens Next:

• • The FBI is investigating to uncover who accessed the jury roster information to leak names and addresses to the would-be briber. All parties in the case had brief access to unredacted juror details during selection.
  • Agents will likely dust the cash and gift bag for fingerprints, check for any security camera footage in the juror’s neighborhood, review phone records, and interview the juror, relative and defendants.
  • If identified, the briber and any co-conspirators could face serious additional federal charges of bribery, jury tampering, obstruction of justice and conspiracy that carry lengthy prison terms.
  • The sequestered jury will continue deliberating on the fraud charges against the current defendants, but the judge may need to interview jurors again to ensure no others were compromised.
  • If convicted, the defense may raise the bribery attempt as potential grounds for a mistrial or to argue the defendants can’t get a fair trial in the current venue and request a new trial elsewhere.

FAQs:

• • Is jury tampering common in federal trials? No, blatant bribery attempts like this are highly unusual, especially in white-collar fraud cases. Most experts called it unprecedented in their experience.
  • What if the juror had taken the bribe? If the juror kept the money and tried to sway deliberations, they could have been charged criminally as well once it came to light.
  • Will the dismissed jurors still get in trouble? Unlikely, since they reported the incident promptly. But the second juror may get a harsh lecture about discussing the case with family against court rules.
  • Could the bribery attempt derail the whole fraud case? Potentially, if misconduct is found that prevents a fair trial. But so far the judge seems committed to pushing ahead with the current jury as long as no others were tainted.
  • What does this incident say about the fraud case stakes? The brazen $120k bribery attempt suggests that someone with a lot to lose if the defendants are convicted is willing to take desperate measures to avoid that outcome.

Potential Charges in the Feeding Our Future Case:

• • Jury Tampering: The woman who offered the bribe and instructed the relative to tell the juror how to vote clearly tried to unlawfully influence the juror, violating the jury tampering statute.
  • Bribery of a Juror: By conveying a $120,000 bribe with promise of more money to come if the juror voted for acquittal, the woman blatantly committed juror bribery.
  • Obstruction of Justice: The bribery scheme was a corrupt attempt to interfere with the due administration of justice in a pending federal court proceeding.
  • Conspiracy: Whoever provided the briber with the juror’s identity and address and the cash for the bribe could face conspiracy charges if they knew of the scheme.
  • Contempt of Court: The judge may also hold any parties found responsible for the bribe in criminal contempt for violating orders not to contact jurors.

Proving the Charges:

• • To convict someone of jury tampering, prosecutors must show they knowingly attempted to influence a juror’s vote or decision by unlawful means like bribery or intimidation.
  • A bribery conviction requires proof that something of value was offered, promised or given to a juror with corrupt intent to influence their official action as a juror.
  • For obstruction, the government must show a person corruptly endeavored to influence, obstruct or impede the due administration of justice in a pending federal court case.
  • Conspiracy requires proof of an agreement between two or more people to commit a federal crime like jury tampering, along with an overt act to further the conspiracy.
  • Contempt of court requires showing a willful violation of a clear and reasonably specific court order, rule or command, without a good faith effort at compliance.

FAQs:

• • What if someone bribed a juror without telling them it was a bribe? Intent to influence the juror can be inferred from the circumstances, and ignorance of the law is no excuse, so bribery charges could still apply.
  • Does it matter that the juror didn’t actually take or keep the money? No, the bribery crime is in corruptly offering or giving the bribe with intent to influence, even if ultimately unsuccessful.
  • Could whoever leaked the juror info claim they didn’t know about the bribe? Possibly, but prosecutors would argue the timing and context suggests complicity in the scheme.
  • Do prosecutors need to show the bribe actually impacted the case? No, jury tampering and obstruction only require an attempt to corruptly influence the proceedings or due administration of justice.
  • What’s the likely prison time if convicted of these charges? Penalties can vary based on circumstances, but the briber would likely face at least 5-10 years if convicted on all charges, more if they have prior offenses.

An Unprecedented Situation:

• • Multiple legal experts and former federal prosecutors said they had never seen such a brazen, high-value attempt to bribe a juror in their careers.
  • With most of the multi-week fraud trial complete, declaring a mistrial now would mean an immense waste of court resources, so the judge is trying to preserve the proceeding if possible.
  • But the disruption to deliberations and jurors’ focus is undeniable. Even if no other jurors took bribes, they may wonder if they can trust their fellow jurors now.
  • Jurors often find sequestration isolating and stressful in normal circumstances. To have it sprung on them unexpectedly amid a bribery scandal only heightens the pressure.
  • The fraud case is complex, with over $250 million in alleged losses and 4 dozen defendants. Deliberating while cut off from family under guard after 2 jurors were dismissed will be taxing.

If Misconduct Not Contained:

• • The judge’s priority is to keep the trial going to a verdict if no other jurors were tainted. A few alternates remain who could step in if needed.
  • But if the investigation reveals other jurors were offered bribes or the judge finds the jury is now too biased, she may have to declare a mistrial.
  • A mistrial would mean either impaneling a whole new jury to re-hear the case, likely many months later given the court’s busy docket, or dismissing the charges.
  • If a verdict is reached but the defense can show on appeal that the bribery prejudiced jurors and prevented a fair trial, the appeals court could overturn any convictions.
  • So while the case is moving forward for now, the attempted bribery has cast substantial uncertainty over whether any guilty verdicts will withstand challenge.

FAQs:

• • Why would the court declare a mistrial instead of just replacing tainted jurors? If misconduct is so widespread that it appears to have biased remaining jurors, seating alternates may not cure the prejudice to a fair trial.
  • How likely is an appeals court to overturn a conviction in this case? It depends on the strength of evidence that jurors were actually biased, but courts are very protective of jury impartiality and fair trials.
  • Would a mistrial mean the fraud charges get dropped? Not necessarily – prosecutors could re-file the charges and try again with a new jury unless the judge finds intentional misconduct by the government.
  • Do the defendants get any say in whether to proceed after the bribe attempt? The defense may object to going forward and ask for a mistrial, but it’s the judge’s decision on whether a fair trial is still possible.
  • Would a mistrial or overturned conviction affect the separate bribery case? No, the charges against whoever attempted to bribe the juror would move forward regardless of what ultimately happens in the underlying fraud trial.

Bribery Suggests Consciousness of Guilt:

• • The alleged fraud scheme was brazen in falsely claiming millions of non-existent meals served to exponentially increase federal reimbursements.
  • Using the stolen funds to buy luxury real estate, cars, and more while community kids went hungry is particularly unconscionable if proven.
  • An extreme, last-ditch attempt to derail the trial by bribing a juror suggests the defendants or their allies fear the evidence against them is strong.
  • Offering $120,000 cash to a juror indicates that at least that much and likely far more illicit profits are on the line for those hoping for acquittal.
  • The desperate bribery scheme could be seen as a sign that the defendants recognize the weight of the case and their own guilt, and will do anything to avoid accountability.

A Black Eye for Pandemic Relief:

• • The Feeding Our Future case represents the largest pandemic-related fraud uncovered so far, highlighting how much Covid aid was lost to fraud.
  • The alleged exploitation of child nutrition programs to enrich defendants risks eroding public trust in the integrity and oversight of those critical services.
  • With so many facing hardship during the pandemic, seeing government aid stolen for personal luxuries is particularly galling to many taxpayers.
  • The case lends fuel to critics who argue that massive Covid relief programs were rushed out with insufficient controls and susceptible to widespread abuse.
  • While stopping theft is key, officials have to be careful not to overcorrect with restrictions that deny prompt aid to families and businesses truly in need during crises.

FAQs:

• • Is this case unusual in the amount of money allegedly stolen? Yes, most Covid relief fraud cases have involved thousands or millions in losses – over $250 million in this one case is extreme.
  • What happens to any money and assets seized from the defendants? Forfeited funds and property will likely first go toward restitution to reimburse stolen aid, with the rest going to the federal government.
  • How do sentences for federal fraud compare to state-level cases? Federal fraud convictions often bring significantly higher potential prison terms and financial penalties than similar state offenses.
  • Will all 47 defendants end up going to trial? Many will likely plead guilty in exchange for reduced charges or lighter sentences, especially after seeing the outcomes for the first defendants to face a jury.
  • Are more indictments expected or is the case winding down? Prosecutors say the investigation is ongoing and additional charges are possible against those not yet publicly charged.

Questions: The Feeding Our Future Fraud Scheme

• • 1. Approximately how much federal aid did Feeding Our Future receive and disburse in 2021 according to prosecutors?
    • A) $20 million
    • B) $50 million
    • C) $100 million
    • D) $200 million
  • 2. How many people have been criminally charged in the case so far?
    • A) 7
    • B) 18
    • C) 47
    • D) 70
  • 3. What did FBI agents allegedly find in a safe at defendant Abdiaziz Farah’s home?
    • A) Fake meal reimbursement forms
    • B) Over $64,000 in cash
    • C) A list of names and addresses of jurors
    • D) A second set of accounting books
  • 4. How much have federal agents seized so far from defendants in cash and property?
    • A) $500,000
    • B) $5 million
    • C) $50 million
    • D) $250 million
  • 5. What did defendant Guhaad Said allegedly advise others about defrauding the child nutrition programs?
    • A) It was a victimless crime
    • B) They would never get caught
    • C) It was basically free money
    • D) The programs had it coming

Answers: The Feeding Our Future Fraud Scheme

• • 1. D) Feeding Our Future disbursed nearly $200 million in federal reimbursements in 2021, up from just $3.4 million in 2019.
  • 2. C) 47 people have been charged so far for alleged involvement in the fraud scheme, with prosecutors saying more indictments are possible.
  • 3. B) During a January 2022 raid, FBI agents found over $64,000 in cash stashed at the home of defendant Abdiaziz Farah.
  • 4. C) To date, federal authorities have seized approximately $50 million in cash, real estate and other assets traceable to the alleged fraud.
  • 5. C) Per court filings, defendant Guhaad Said told others that defrauding the federal child nutrition programs was an easy way to get “free money.”

Questions: The Juror Bribery Attempt

• • 1. When did the alleged juror bribery attempt occur in relation to the trial?
    • A) Before opening statements
    • B) In the middle of testimony
    • C) After closing arguments
    • D) While the jury was already deliberating
  • 2. How much cash was allegedly offered to the juror in exchange for a not guilty vote?
    • A) $1,000
    • B) $12,000
    • C) $120,000
    • D) $1.2 million
  • 3. What did the juror who was offered the bribe do upon learning of it?
    • A) Told the judge immediately
    • B) Kept it secret from the court
    • C) Called 911 to report it to police
    • D) Asked for more money to stay quiet
  • 4. Why was a second juror also dismissed shortly after the bribery attempt came to light?
    • A) They also received a bribe offer
    • B) They tried to conceal the scheme
    • C) They discussed the case with a relative
    • D) Their impartiality was questioned
  • 5. What step did the judge take with the remaining jury after the bribe attempt?
    • A) Dismissed themand declared a mistrial
    • B) Sequestered them in a hotel
    • C) Allowed them to deliberate virtually
    • D) Ordered them not to discuss it

Answers: The Juror Bribery Attempt

• • 1. C) The attempted bribe occurred on a Sunday evening after closing arguments had concluded, just before the jury was set to begin deliberations.
  • 2. C) The juror was allegedly offered a bag containing $120,000 in cash to vote not guilty, with the promise of more money to come.
  • 3. C) Upon learning of the bribery attempt from a relative, the juror promptly called 911 and reported it to the police.
  • 4. C) A second juror was dismissed after court officials learned they had discussed the bribery incident with a family member, violating court instructions.
  • 5. B) In response to the bribe attempt, the judge ordered the remaining jurors sequestered at a hotel, kept under guard as they deliberate.

Questions: Charges & Consequences of Juror Bribery

• • 1. What is the maximum prison sentence for attempting to bribe a federal juror?
    • A) 1 year
    • B) 5 years
    • C) 10 years
    • D) 15 years
  • 2. What other charges besides bribery could apply to this juror tampering scheme?
    • A) Obstruction of justice
    • B) Conspiracy
    • C) Contempt of court
    • D) All of the above
  • 3. For a bribery conviction, what key element must prosecutors prove about the $120k offer?
    • A) It was paid in cash
    • B) The juror kept the money
    • C) It actually influenced the verdict
    • D) It was given with corrupt intent
  • 4. What potential impact could the bribe attempt have on the fraud case even though it was reported?
    • A) The judge could declare a mistrial
    • B) Convictions could get overturned on appeal
    • C) It could be used to argue jury bias or unfairness
    • D) All of the above
  • 5. How does the large bribery figure reflect on the underlying fraud case?
    • A) Suggests the fraud evidence is weak
    • B) Shows the defendants are victims of government bullying
    • C) Indicates a consciousness of guilt and high stakes
    • D) Means the fraud charges are likely to be dismissed

Answers: Charges & Consequences of Juror Bribery

• • 1. D) Bribing or attempting to bribe a federal juror is punishable by up to 15 years in prison under 18 U.S.C. § 201.
  • 2. D) In addition to bribery, the juror tampering scheme could lead to obstruction of justice, conspiracy and contempt of court charges.
  • 3. D) For bribery, prosecutors must show the $120,000 was corruptly offered or promised with intent to influence the juror’s actions, even if unsuccessful.
  • 4. D) Despite being reported, the bribery attempt could still potentially derail the fraud case via mistrial, appeal or arguments of jury bias.
  • 5. C) The willingness to pay $120k and promise more suggests defendants or allies believe the fraud evidence is strong and their liability exposure high.

Disclaimer

This article discussing the alleged juror bribery attempt and underlying fraud charges in the Feeding Our Future case is based on publicly reported information from news media sources. The analysis of relevant laws and potential legal consequences is presented for broad informational purposes only.

Nothing in this article should be construed as formal legal advice or as creating any attorney-client relationship. Laws and legal proceedings can be complex and fact-specific. Anyone facing investigation or criminal charges should consult with an experienced defense attorney licensed in their jurisdiction to obtain personalized guidance on their case.