Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2024/06/05/juror-dismissed-after-reporting-that-someone-dropped-120000-bag-of-cash-at-her-home-and-promised-more-after-acquittal.html
…
21 Likes
Before allowing the trial to continue with more closing arguments on Monday, U.S. District Judge Nancy Brasel questioned the remaining 17 jurors and alternates, and none reported any unauthorized contact. Brasel decided to sequester the jury for the rest of the proceeding as a precaution.
Umm…they’re just going to take the jurors’ word for that? Why wouldn’t you declare a mistrial immediately and start over?
33 Likes
For a second I suspected reps from the NFL, but the case with Brett Favre was a different one about people in MS taking money intended for children in need:
Can’t wait to see all of the folks who did this in multiple states face consequences for their actions.
23 Likes
Keep the money a vote to put them in prison for your safety. 
17 Likes
This is outrageous behavior. This is stuff that happens in mob movies.
16 Likes
A mistrial would be a bigger win for the defense than the prosecution since it would help the defendants avoid consequences for their actions longer. As far as I can tell the prosecutors haven’t asked for a mistrial either.
8 Likes
It feels really good to read a story about some ordinary random person showing integrity like this!
Thanks for posting it!
25 Likes
But letting it go forward with a possibly compromised jury is a bigger risk for prosecutors. If there is an acquittal, and then they discover the jury was compromised…there’s not a damn thing they can do about it. Double jeopardy would prevent a retrial at that point. I hope they’ve done some additional investigation to be sure no one else was compromised besides just asking the jurors.
13 Likes
They could prosecute for jury tampering, which is potentially an even more serious crime.
8 Likes
Maybe, but they’re currently charged with committing $40 million worth of fraud. I don’t really want to see that kind of crime go unpunished. Especially when they can put the brakes on the trial to ensure they have an uncompromised jury.
11 Likes
I don’t think the prosecutors want the crime to go unpunished either. I assume they’d be asking for a mistrial if they believed the rest of the jury to be compromised.
3 Likes
Yes, kind of my point. The article just says they interviewed the other jurors and they said they hadn’t had any contact with anyone. I’m suggesting maybe they dig a little deeper than just taking the jurors’ word for it. If one of them decided to take they offer, they sure as hell aren’t going to reveal that just because someone asked.
13 Likes
Depends how the judge asked.
“If anyone approached you with an offer of money, this is the time to share that information if you don’t want to be charged with a felony” would convince a lot of people to fess up.
10 Likes
ok, and say one or more other jury memebers then says, “yeah, i got $100k, but i gave some to my mother and she spent it.”
are they then in hot water, legally? i know that’s a silly thought, but should they - sheepishly - admit they did accept the bribe, what happens then?
edit: i see @Brainspore has a similar thought.
4 Likes
Yes, because people never lie to judges.
3 Likes
(Today is Wednesday.) Rob’s linked NBC article is from Monday. A second juror, who heard about the attempted bribery, was excused on Tuesday…
(gift link)
On Tuesday, a second juror — a 25-year-old woman from Savage — said she heard about the attempted bribery from a family member. An alternate — a 30-year-old Andover man — replaced her as the jury weighs 41 charges against seven people accused of stealing money meant to feed needy children.
…
U.S. District Judge Nancy Brasel sequestered the jury Monday night after the attempted bribery, citing their safety. Brasel also added security to the courtroom, detained defendants and had an FBI agent confiscate their phones. Authorities are investigating the leak of jurors’ names, which hadn’t been publicly disclosed to anyone besides the attorneys.
(edited to add the second quoted paragraph)
6 Likes
Even if they get a conviction, I’ll bet the defense will argue that this whole incident biased the jury against the defendants on appeal. What a freaking mess.
The jurors are going to put two and two together and figure out what happened, and that’s just ammo for the defense team to use on appeal.
3 Likes
“That’s ok mam, we’ll take care of, what did you say $100k?, and make sure it’s checked in securely as evidence when we eventually find those responsible for trying to bribe you with $80k.”
9 Likes
kinda bogus they can’t keep the bag of money if they don’t do as asked imho.
(kinda a rookie move to make payment before services are rendered in these kinds of situations)
2 Likes
If it worked it would be a steal. If it caused a mistrial it would still be a very cost-effective way to keep their clients out of prison for a while longer.
2 Likes
