Skip to main content
Mostly Clear icon
66º

First of two juries chosen for trial of former JEA execs accused of conspiracy, wire fraud

Federal trial set to begin nearly 2 years after pair was indicted. They now face 25 years in federal prison if convicted

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. – Nearly two years after former JEA executives Aaron Zahn and Ryan Wannemacher were indicted, the first of two juries was chosen Thursday for their upcoming federal trial.

Zahn, the utility’s former CEO, and Wannemacher, his former chief financial officer, are charged with conspiracy and wire fraud in connection to a proposed bonus plan that prosecutors said could have paid out hundreds of millions of dollars if the utility were sold. They pleaded not guilty following their indictment in March 2022.

There will be separate juries for each defendant, so the court chose the jury for Zahn on Thursday and will choose Wannemacher’s jury on Friday. The trial itself is scheduled to begin with opening statements on Tuesday. The trial is expected to last about four weeks. If convicted on all charges, Zahn and Wannemacher face up to 25 years in federal prison.

TIMELINE: The federal case against two former JEA executives

While they had planned to have 50 potential jurors on Thursday for the selection of Zahn’s jury, the judge started the day by informing attorneys that given the length of the trial, they were having some difficulty in identifying jurors who didn’t have hardships. His best estimate was that they would have around 45 potential jurors to start the selection process and a total of 47 potential jurors were examined over the course of the day.

Once questioning began, the first question from the judge was whether any potential jurors knew anything about the case, either through personal knowledge, discussion with others, or reading or hearing something in news media or through social media. Nineteen of the 46 jurors indicated yes, and were then questioned individually in private by the judge and attorneys.

Potential jurors faced additional questions to determine whether there was anything that could prevent them from being an impartial juror. Notably, when asked if any of them had service with JEA in any form, more than half said yes. But, when asked if the fact that they are a JEA customer would affect their ability to be a fair and impartial juror, nobody said there would be an impact.