Port Authority Bid-Leaking Case Began With Christmas Cards, Officer Testifies; Judge Sends It to Grand Jury

MOBILE, Ala. — A criminal investigation into a former McDuffie Coal Terminal supervisor accused of leaking confidential bid information to companies seeking business with the Alabama Port Authority began with something as ordinary as a stack of Christmas cards, a port police officer testified Monday. At the end of the preliminary hearing, a Mobile County judge ruled that prosecutors have enough evidence to take the Port Authority bid-leaking case against Daniel Joseph Gill to a grand jury.

Gill, 55, of Bay Minette, faces 18 criminal charges: nine counts of computer tampering, seven counts of theft of trademarks or trade secrets and two counts of possession of a forged instrument. The charges are accusations, and Gill is presumed innocent unless and until he is proven guilty.

Mobile County District Judge Zackery Moore heard testimony from two officers with the Alabama Port Authority Police Department before sending the case forward. Gill’s defense attorney, Jason Darley, used cross-examination to press one central point: that investigators have found no evidence Gill was paid by anyone.

How Christmas cards sparked the Port Authority bid-leaking probe

Alabama Port Authority Police Department Cpl. David Smith testified that Gill sent Christmas cards every year to all of the employees at the coal facility where he worked.

Last year, according to Smith, the Port Authority’s Human Resources department accidentally gave Gill a list of the home addresses of all 379 employees at the Port Authority — not just those at the coal terminal.

When those cards arrived, it raised alarms. Smith testified that some people, including some board members, wanted to know how Gill had obtained their home addresses in the first place. Answering that question is what led investigators to uncover what prosecutors allege was criminal activity involving confidential information on contract bids.

160,000 emails and a subject line: “FYI”

Smith testified that investigators found Gill had forwarded the employee address list from his work email account to a Gmail account linked to a side business he owned.

From there, the investigation widened. Investigators traced Gill’s email activity back to 2022, Smith said, reviewing some 160,000 emails in the process. According to his testimony, they found that Gill had repeatedly forwarded bid information to his Gmail account and then sent that same information on to companies that were looking to do business with the port.

Many of those emails carried the subject line “FYI,” Smith testified.

In many — but not all — of those cases, Smith said, the company Gill was allegedly trying to help ended up winning the contract.

Tires, an RV and a $5,000 threshold

A second officer, Justin Williams, testified about a separate allegation involving a purchase of tires.

Williams testified that in June 2025, Gill approved two invoices for the purchase of tires that investigators later confirmed were on Gill’s recreational vehicle in Bay Minette. According to Williams, the $6,618 purchase was split into two invoices so that each would come in under $5,000 — the amount that would have triggered a review by Gill’s boss.

Testimony at the hearing did not spell out which specific counts correspond to the tire purchase. The charges against Gill include two counts of possession of a forged instrument.

Defense: “What benefit is he receiving?”

Darley, Gill’s attorney, noted during the hearing that the criminal complaints against his client reference actions taken for financial benefit.

“What benefit is he receiving here?” Darley asked Smith on cross-examination.

Smith acknowledged that police have uncovered no evidence that Gill received any money from any of the companies he is accused of helping. Darley suggested that his client may have been trying to favor local companies.

Darley also pointed out that one of the companies that lost a contract was Continental Aerospace Engineering, which until this year was owned by a state-owned corporation. He asked Smith whether it was possible that Gill had been motivated by an effort to help American companies.

After the hearing, Darley summed up the defense’s view of the case:

“There’s no criminal activity with finances whatsoever. I think the agent was fairly solid on that – that there’s been no financial irregularities. Nobody’s alleged to have paid Mr. Gill anything. I think what you have here is someone that was trying to do better for the port and may have gone about it in the wrong way.”

Investigators’ theory: a bid for promotion

Smith offered a different possible explanation. He testified that investigators believe Gill may have been angling for a promotion and tried to enlist outside help to get it.

Legally, however, motive does not matter. Accessing and leaking confidential information is a crime regardless of whether the person who does it receives a monetary reward. That distinction is likely to be central as the case moves forward, since the defense’s strongest argument so far rests on the absence of any payment to Gill.

Other employees also affected

Gill is not the only former Port Authority employee facing consequences from the investigation. Smith testified that three other former port employees also face criminal charges, and that a fourth employee lost her job in the Human Resources department.

Testimony at Monday’s hearing did not detail the charges against the other three former employees, and it did not identify the Human Resources employee who lost her job. It also did not specify whether her firing was connected to the address list that was mistakenly provided to Gill.

The charges, explained

Gill faces three types of charges under Alabama law. In general terms:

• Computer tampering (9 counts): Alabama law makes it a crime to access a computer system or data without authorization or to use, disclose or move information beyond what a person is authorized to do. Prosecutors allege Gill moved confidential port information out of the Port Authority’s systems.
• Theft of trademarks or trade secrets (7 counts): This charge covers taking or disclosing protected confidential business information. Here, it relates to the bid information Gill is accused of sharing with outside companies.
• Possession of a forged instrument (2 counts): This charge generally involves knowingly possessing or using a falsely made or altered document. Testimony did not specify which documents these counts involve.

What a preliminary hearing does — and doesn’t — decide

Monday’s proceeding was a preliminary hearing in Mobile County District Court. At this stage, a judge does not decide whether a defendant is guilty. Instead, the judge decides whether there is probable cause — enough evidence to believe a crime was committed and that the defendant committed it — to send the case to a grand jury.

Preliminary hearings also give the defense an early chance to question the state’s witnesses under oath, which is why Darley’s cross-examination of Smith focused on what investigators have and have not found.

Judge Moore found the evidence sufficient, so the case now goes to a Mobile County grand jury. The grand jury will review the evidence in private and decide whether to return an indictment. If Gill is indicted, the case will move to Mobile County Circuit Court, where he would be arraigned and the case would proceed toward a plea agreement or trial. A grand jury can also decline to indict.

About the McDuffie Coal Terminal and the Port Authority

The McDuffie Coal Terminal is a coal-handling facility operated by the Alabama Port Authority at the Port of Mobile. The Port Authority is the state agency that runs Alabama’s public seaport facilities in Mobile and is overseen by a board of directors.

Like other public agencies, the Port Authority buys goods and services through bidding processes intended to be fair to every competing company. Keeping bid information confidential is meant to ensure no company gains an advantage by seeing a competitor’s information or inside details before a contract is awarded.

Key facts at a glance

• Defendant: Daniel Joseph Gill, 55, of Bay Minette, a former supervisor at the McDuffie Coal Terminal
• Charges: 18 total — nine counts of computer tampering, seven counts of theft of trademarks or trade secrets, two counts of possession of a forged instrument
• Ruling: Mobile County District Judge Zackery Moore found sufficient evidence to send the case to a grand jury
• Emails reviewed: about 160,000, dating back to 2022
• Employee list: home addresses of all 379 Port Authority employees, accidentally provided by Human Resources
• Tire purchase: $6,618, allegedly split into two invoices under the $5,000 review threshold in June 2025
• Others affected: three other former port employees charged; a fourth employee lost her Human Resources job

What we don’t know yet

Several questions remain unanswered after Monday’s hearing, including:

• Which companies received the bid information and which contracts were involved, beyond the reference to Continental Aerospace Engineering losing a contract.
• The specific charges against the three other former port employees.
• When a grand jury will take up Gill’s case.
• Whether the Port Authority has changed its bidding or data-handling procedures since the investigation began.

No date has been publicly announced for grand jury consideration of the case. Southalnews will follow the case as it moves forward.