Juror in Feeding Our Future trial excused after woman offers bag of $120,000 in cash to acquit defendants

Dressed in black, a mysterious woman arrived at a juror’s suburban house late Sunday night, clutching a party bag stuffed with wads of cash, nearly $120,000 in all.

It was a present for the 23-year-old juror in the Feeding Our Future federal trial, the woman explained to the juror’s father-in-law, who answered the door just before 9 p.m. If the juror voted to acquit the seven defendants in the fraud case, there would “be more of that present tomorrow,” the woman said, handing over a white floral gift bag filled with $100, $50 and $20 bills, according to an FBI search warrant filed Monday.

The juror immediately reported the incident to Spring Lake Park police and turned over the bag of cash to the FBI, which is investigating the incident. The juror was dismissed before the jury gathered in the Minneapolis courtroom Monday morning.

“This is outrageous behavior,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph Thompson told U.S. District Judge Nancy Brasel. “This is stuff that happens in mob movies.”

The shocking development in the high-profile trial, now entering its seventh week, came just before closing arguments wrapped up and the jury started deliberating late Monday afternoon. The trial is the first in a broader case that prosecutors have called one of the largest pandemic fraud schemes in the country, with 70 people charged with stealing more than $250 million in federal money meant to feed needy children.

The woman used the juror’s first name, according to the search warrant, though that name hasn’t been disclosed publicly; she’s been referred to in court only as Juror #52. Before jury selection, attorneys and defendants in the case briefly saw the list of names and addresses of people called for jury duty, Brasel said.

“This can’t be allowed,” Thompson said of bribing a juror, which carries a sentence of up to 10 years in prison, adding that the incident could have repercussions for the next trials of more than three dozen people. “This strikes at the integrity of our system.”

In a rare move as a result of the incident, Brasel sequestered the jury, which now has 12 jurors and five alternates. One by one, Brasel questioned the remaining 17 jurors to ensure they hadn’t had any contact with anyone about the case in the past six weeks. They all confirmed they hadn’t.

Brasel also ordered the defendants’ phones confiscated by an FBI agent to investigate the leak of jurors’ names, added security to the courtroom and detained all seven defendants. Defense attorneys called the attempted bribery “un-American,” “very troubling,” “horrific” and “unprecedented,” but they had argued against detaining the defendants, none of whom have been in custody since the start of 2023. One has a GPS ankle monitoring device.

Brasel said they will be detained until investigators can figure out if one of them leaked the list. Defendants and their family members watching in the gallery cried and hugged as U.S. Marshals escorted the defendants out.

Brasel said the jurors are concerned about their families’ safety and the juror whose home was approached is terrified. “The juror remains at risk for retaliation,” she said.

The attempted bribe is the latest unexpected twist in the lengthy trial. Last week, six of the seven defense attorneys rested their cases without calling any witnesses despite saying earlier that they would call their own experts and eyewitnesses. Then, one defendant decided to take the stand, testifying about how he distributed food to thousands of Bloomington families but had no role in financial paperwork.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys addressed the jury for 11 hours in closing arguments on Friday and Monday.

Said Shafii Farah, Abdiaziz Shafii Farah, Mohamed Jama Ismail, Abdimajid Mohamed Nur, Abdiwahab Maalim Aftin, Mukhtar Mohamed Shariff and Hayat Mohamed Nur were charged in 2022 with wire fraud, money laundering and other charges. They have connections to a Shakopee restaurant, Empire Cuisine & Market.

The seven defendants are among 70 people charged in the broader case involving U.S. Department of Agriculture programs that reimburse schools, day cares and nonprofits for feeding low-income children after school and during the summer.

The six men and one woman received more than $40 million for 18 million meals distributed at 50 food sites across Minnesota — from Rochester to St. Cloud — in 2020 and 2021. Prosecutors allege about 10% of that money was spent on food and defendants ran a “brazen” fraud scheme that created numerous shell companies to launder money, submitted rosters of made-up children’s names and inflated meal claims.

Prosecutors also say some of the defendants gave kickbacks to other people in the scheme disguised as consulting fees, leading to bribery charges. They said defendants spent the money on themselves, including a $1 million lakefront Prior Lake property, luxury cars and gold jewelry.

They’ve called more than 30 witnesses and showcased 1,300 exhibits at the Minneapolis courtroom.

Defense attorneys sought to cast doubt on the FBI investigation because agents didn’t verify meals were served by visiting warehouses or food distribution sites overseen by St. Paul nonprofit Partners in Nutrition and St. Anthony nonprofit Feeding Our Future.

In closing arguments, they said prosecutors had insufficient evidence, selective data and unreliable witnesses recalling details from years ago. They’ve sought to discredit a former Feeding Our Future employee who testified about a “booming” fraud scheme of kickbacks.

Andrew Garvis, who represents Aftin, said in his hourlong closing argument that FBI agents never searched Aftin’s apartment or email, and isn’t accusing him of extravagant spending, like other defendants. Garvis said the FBI’s “non-investigation” was based on confirmation bias that the amount of food doled out was improbable. “The government made a giant assumption,” he added.

Defense attorneys said their clients provided real food to real children. Alleged kickbacks, they’ve said, were proper payments — part of a common East African culture of informal transactions to friends and family.

Shariff’s attorney, Andrew Mohring, in a nearly two-hour closing argument, urged jurors to consider each defendant’s charges separately.

Shariff, 33, a former Microsoft software engineer and married father of two, was the only defendant who testified. Mohring said Shariff had limited responsibility running food sites, not preparing any financial documents he forwarded on.

“He was the logistics guy, not the money guy,” he said.

Hayat Nur, Abdimajid Nur’s sister, had a small clerical role passing on child roster lists someone else created and is being swept up in allegations by association, said her attorney Nicole Kettwick. Prosecutors discussed her for about 10 minutes in four weeks and gave no evidence she knowingly did anything wrong or got rich, Kettwick said.

“You’re missing vital information,” she said. “You can’t lump them all in as the government has suggested you do.”

In his rebuttal, Thompson said defendants’ arguments that they had minor roles fits with a conspiracy. If defendants served some food but not all 18 million meals, that’s still fraud, he said.

“The money was flowing like crazy,” he said. “It was an overwhelming fraud scheme.”