>> Cathy: THIS WEDNESDAY A FEDERAL JURY FOUND FEEDING OUR FUTURE LEADER AIMEE BOCK GUILTY ON ALL CHARGES ALONG WITH FORMER RESTAURANT OWNER SALIM SAID.

THIS IS THE SECOND TRIAL OF THE $250 MILLION PANDEMIC FRAUD CASE.

WE CHECKED IN WITH MINNESOTA STAR TRIBUNE REPORTER JEFFREY MEITRODT JUST A FEW WEEKS AGO, HE OINS US WITH THE CONCLUSION OF THIS TRIAL.

IT WAS REALLY A BUSY TRIAL, MY GOODNESS SAKES.

SAY, I THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING, FIVE WEEKS OF TESTIMONY, FIVE HOURS OF DELIBERATION.

I KNOW THAT ONE OF THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS WAS KIND OF CONFUSED ABOUT THAT.

WHAT DID YOU MAKE OF THAT?

>> WELL, WE ALL THOUGHT THEY'D BE OUT A LITTLE ONGER THAN FIVE HOURS.

YOU KNOW, FIRST TRIAL TOOK FOUR DAYS FOR THE JURY TO COME BACK WITH A VERDICT.

AND SO I THOUGHT FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD, I DIDN'T COVER THE FIRST TRIAL, ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES DID, BUT FROM WHAT I CAN TELL THE PRESENTATION WAS REALLY SHARPER THE SECOND TIME AROUND.

AND BOTH OF THE DEFENDANTS TOOK THE STAND.

AND I DON'T THINK THERE WAS ANY STOPPING AIMEE BOCK FROM TAKING THE STAND.

BUT I THINK ULTIMATELY IT SUNK HER.

>> Eric: AND THE JUDGE SENSES THAT THEY ARE FLIGHT RISKS, I GUESS HE'S TAKEN STEPS TO MAKE THAT IMPOSSIBLE.

>> RIGHT, THEY'RE GOING TO BE LOCKED UP UNTIL SENTENCING.

, AND WHEN IS THAT, HAS THAT BEEN SCHEDULED?

>> NO, THAT GENERALLY TAKES A MONTH OR TWO FROM THE VERDICT.

>> Cathy: WERE YOU SURPRISED THAT AIMEE BOCK TESTIFYING IN HER OWN DEFENSE SUNK HER?

I KNOW HER ATTORNEY DIDN'T THINK SHE SHOULD DO IT, I KNOW WHEN YOU TALKED LAST YOU INDICATED SHE WAS A VERY PERSONABLE INDIVIDUAL, WELL SPOKEN.

AND THAT DIDN'T WASH WITH THE JURY?

>> SHE HAS AN EXPLANATION FOR EVERYTHING.

AIMEE BOCK I SAW THREE YEARS AGO WHEN I FIRST INTERVIEWED HER WAS THE SAME AIMEE BOCK WE SAW ON HE STAND.

SOMEBODY WHO HAS A COMPELLING NARRATIVE OF HER OWN, REALLY SORT OF FACT-BASED ACCOUNT OF LIKE WHAT HAPPENED AND WHY IT'S PLAUSIBLE THAT SHE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON.

YOU KNOW, SHE WAS ABLE TO THROW A LOT OF HER COLLEAGUES UNDER THE BUS AND MAKE IT SOUND LIKE SHE COULD HAVE BEEN SORT OF THE ALOOF, UNINVOLVED CEO.

WHAT I THOUGHT WAS FASCINATING WAS THAT THE THREE WITNESSES WHO SUNK HER REALLY WEREN'T CENTRAL TO THE ENTIRE CONSPIRACY.

IT WAS THE THREE BOARD MEMBERS.

WE HAD TWO BARTENDERS AND A MECHANIC.

>> Eric: AND THEY DIDN'T KNOW THEY WERE BOARD MEMBERS UNTIL THEY WERE TOLD.

>> THEY HAD NO IDEA.

IT WAS THE COMIC RELIEF, MOST OF US THOUGHT THIS WAS THE COMIC RELIEF PART OF THE TRIAL.

THEY WERE ALL UP THERE, ALMOST HAD TO THEM TO BELIEVE THEM.

THEY WERE NOT THE KIND OF GUYS YOU WOULD EEXPECT ON A BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

THEY THOUGHT IT WAS VERY FUNNY THEY COULD EVER HAVE BEEN TAPPED FOR THIS BOARD.

AT THE SAME TIME THEY ERE VERY PERSUASIVE, VERY CREDIBLE.

I THINK ONE TIME AIMEE BOCK REALLY STUMBLED ON THE WITNESS STAND WAS WHEN SHE WAS BEING ASKED ABOUT THEIR TESTIMONY.

THE JURY DIDN'T UY IT.

FOR ONCE HER LIES JUST DIDN'T WORK.

>> Eric: WHAT'S THE SCORECARD GOING ORWARD AND IF THERE ARE FUTURE HEARINGS OR TRIALS WILL THIS ENCOURAGE SOME PLEA BARGAINING, OR?

>> THAT'S THE EXPECTATION.

YOU KNOW, I'VE TALKED TO FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY HERE AS WELL AS PEOPLE ON THE PROSECUTION TEAM AND NOT ONLY IS IT THE FACT THAT THEY GOT THE LEADERS HERE CONVICTED, IT HAPPENED IN FIVE HOURS, VERY TELLING.

THERE'S ALREADY BEEN ALMOST 30 OTHER CONVICTIONS THROUGH EITHER TRIALS OR GUILTY PLEAS AND THAT'S A LOT OF POTENTIAL WITNESSES THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE FACING JUST LIKE AIMEE BOCK AND SALIM SAID DID, YOU KNOW, THERE WERE 7 OR 8 PEOPLE WHO HAD PLEADED GUILTY TO CRIMES IN THIS CASE THAT GO UP THERE AND TELL THEIR STORIES.

AND THERE WILL BE MORE OF THEM FOR ANYBODY ELSE WHO IS FACING A TRIAL.

AND SO I THINK THAT COMES VERY PERSUASIVE IF YOU'RE A DEFENSE ATTORNEY LOOKING AT WHO'S GOING TO COME UP THERE AND TELL STORIES AND THAT YOUR CLIENT -- IT'S PROBABLY BETTER TO CUT A DEAL.

>> Cathy: THINK IT WAS AIMEE BOCK'S ATTORNEY WHO SAID THAT THEY COULD USE THE FACT THAT THE JURY DIDN'T DELIBERATE VERY LONG AT ALL AND THERE WAS MOUNTAINS OF OBVIOUSLY EVIDENCE TO GO THROUGH, THAT HE MIGHT USE THAT AS BASIS FOR AN APPEAL?

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?

>> NO, IT DOESN'T.

THE FACT THAT A JURY HAD ITS MIND MADE UP MAYBE THE MOMENT THAT THEY ENTERED THAT ROOM DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY DIDN'T CONSIDER THE EVIDENCE.

THEY'VE HAD SIX WEEKS TO CONSIDER THE EVIDENCE.

YOU KNOW, THIS HAS BEEN A VERY LONG TRIAL.

THEY'VE BEEN HINKING ABOUT THIS, THEY'VE BEEN TAKING NOTES.

FROM WHAT I COULD TELL THIS WAS A VERY CONSCIENTIOUS JURY.

>> Eric: YOU CAN READ YOUR