The lead prosecutor in the Feeding Our Future fraud investigation revealed Thursday that a defendant scheduled to stand trial next month threatened to kill a witness, underscoring the case’s high stakes and history of unexpected turns.
The shocking detail came out as defense lawyers and prosecutors argued about whether alleged violence and gang affiliation involving defendants Abdulkadir Nur Salah and Salim Said should be admitted as evidence at trial.
“A witness came in and talked about a conversation they had with Salim Said,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Joe Thompson, the lead prosecutor. “During that conversation, Salim threatened to kill that person if they reported fraud to MDE [the Minnesota Department of Education] and the FBI.”
The witness also alleged that Salim Said disclosed a gang affiliation, Thompson said at a court hearing Thursday.
RELATED STORIES
Thursday’s development follows rare allegations from last year that three defendants and two accomplices tried to bribe a juror with $120,000 in cash as deliberations were about to begin in the first trial in the Feeding Our Future case. That case involved other defendants, but could carry significant implications for how the court handles this next trial.
Abdulkadir Nur Salah, Salim Said, Abdi Salah and former Feeding Our Future Executive Director Aimee Bock are scheduled to be jointly tried starting February 3. They are among 70 defendants charged for allegedly stealing $250 million in federal food-aid money meant to feed underserved children.
Abdulkadir Nur Salah’s attorney, Surya Saxena, motioned Thursday for U.S. District Judge Nancy Brasel, who is presiding over the trial, to prohibit prosecutors from raising allegations at trial that his client is or was affiliated with a gang.
Prosecutors said in legal filings that they also obtained a video from Salim Said’s Google drive purportedly showing two unknown men pointing a gun at a person in a bathtub and pistol-whipping the person.
Salim Said and Abdulkadir Nur Salah were co-owners of Safari Restaurant, a once popular Somali restaurant in Minneapolis that is at the center of the upcoming trial. The restaurant is no longer in operation.
Leading up to Thompson’s revelation, Saxena argued in court that the government’s allegation against his client was not related to the fraud case and was “one of these things that should have never been said” and “already has had a significant impact on my client.”
“This kind of thing is character assassination — impugning my client’s reputation,” Saxena said.
Saxena characterized prosecutors’ reasoning for bringing up the allegations as “generic security concerns in other cases that have nothing to do with this trial.”
“I would like one of the four prosecutors to stand up before you and tell you they made a mistake,” he added.
Thompson countered, noting that he had “far more than generic security concerns.”
“We do have witnesses that will testify to threats and acts of violence and gang affiliation,” Thompson said, adding that prosecutors and investigators found “a horrific video” on Salim Said’s Google drive. “Witnesses told us a chilling tale.”
Thompson said that if prosecutors decide to bring the allegations up at trial, they will “raise it far in advance” with Brasel.
Saxena, however, pressed Brasel to decide Thursday whether the evidence should be allowed at trial.
Adrian Montez, Salim Said’s attorney, also argued that prosecutors haven’t met the legal burden to introduce the allegations at trial.
“We have no idea how this video was taken or who it was taken by,” Montez said. “This alleged affiliation with a gang hasn’t been proven by a preponderance of evidence.”
Montez argued that one of the four prosecutors in the courtroom “should have stopped this train before it started.”
A flustered Thompson responded by revealing Salim Said’s alleged threat to kill a witness.
Thompson then revealed details from the video, which he said showed a man being held at gunpoint in a bathtub by two other unknown men in a Minneapolis home. The person being held at gunpoint was violently pistol-whipped and accused of “treason,” Thompson said. He did not reveal the man’s identity, or note whether his identity is known to prosecutors.
“When we first watched this video, your honor, we weren’t sure if it was going to end with him getting shot in the back of the head,” Thompson said.
It wasn’t clear if the alleged threat to the witness and the contents of the video are related.
Thompson added that it was “outrageous” that a defendant had a video like this.
“We didn’t impugn anyone’s character,” he said. “I’m sick of living in fantasy land in this case. This is what happened.”
Brasel paused the hearing and called the lawyers into her chambers to tell them to tone down their behavior in court.
“The tone and temper must be appropriate in the courtroom,” Brasel said.
When the hearing resumed, Brasel preliminarily granted Saxena’s motion to bar mention of the video or alleged gang affiliation, but opened the door for prosecutors to argue during trial whether the information could be admitted.
Montez did not address the death threat allegation involving his client Salim Said in court, and did not return a voicemail from Sahan Journal seeking comment.
What about Partners in Quality Care?
During the hearing, Brasel barred defense attorneys from cross examining government witnesses about the prosecution’s decision not to file criminal charges against people from the nonprofit, Partners in Quality Care, a rival to Feeding Our Future that has also been connected to the case.
Prosecutors have said the fraud began with the Minnesota Department of Education distributing federal food-aid money to Feeding Our Future and Partners in Quality Care. The two organizations distributed the money further to food vendors and sites that were supposed to feed children during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Some organizations along the chain allegedly reported serving more meals than they actually did in order to receive more federal money. Some never served any meals at all despite claiming that they had.
Several defendants charged in the case received money from Feeding Our Future and Partners in Quality Care, which was led by Kara Lomen at the time. The two organizations were responsible for approving the number of meals served in order to continue the flow of federal money.
Kenneth Udoibok, an attorney for Feeding Our Future’s former executive director Aimee Bock, argued in court Thursday that questions about Partners in Quality Care were relevant to the upcoming trial.
“Ms. Bock was in a unique situation where she had a relationship with another executive director for another nonprofit,” Udoibok said, referring to Bock’s former professional relationship and friendship with Lomen. “Both entities and both people are accused of similar offenses. The jury would need to know the disparity in treatment. I want to know myself.”
“I know you want to know,” Brasel told Udoibok. “But why does the jury need to know it?”
“Because it goes to the credibility of the government witnesses,” Udoibok said. “If some of the evidence used against my client came from that organization [Partners in Quality Care], the jury would not know why this organization is excluded.”
Brasel said the case was no different from charging one gang member with criminal activity but not another.
Udoibok, however, suggested that the government is not prosecuting Partners in Quality Care because Bock sued the state in 2020 for discrimination when it temporarily paused distribution of the federal food-aid money while Partners didn’t take legal action.
Thompson called Udoibok’s suggestion a “conspiracy theory,” and said it wasn’t relevant to the trial. He added that government witnesses don’t charge people with crimes, and are not appropriate people to question regarding the issue.
“I think it’s laughable to bring up that the government didn’t charge the executive director of Partners in Nutrition because she didn’t bring a lawsuit against MDE,” Thompson said.
Partners in Quality Care is also known as Partners in Nutrition.
Thompson added that he was concerned Udoibok would bring up the allegation “as early as opening statements.”
Brasel ultimately ruled in the government’s favor, prohibiting defense attorneys from raising questions at trial about why no one from Partners in Quality Care was charged in the case.
Mayor Jacob Frey on witness list
The prosecution’s potential witness list for trial was made public this week, and includes Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey. The list contains about 175 names; witness lists often include far more names than witnesses actually called at trial.
Aaron Rose, a spokesperson for Frey, said Frey has not been subpoenaed to testify.
One of the defendants in the upcoming trial, Abdi Salah, worked as a senior policy aide in Frey’s office, and left in 2022 when his alleged connection to the case became public. Rose confirmed that Abdi Salah was fired from his position.
In a brief filed in court, prosecutors wrote that when the Minnesota Department of Education began scrutinizing Feeding Our Future, Abdi Salah “used his political influence to lobby politicians to pressure MDE not to shut down Feeding Our Future and sites under its sponsorship so that he and his co-conspirators could continue to carry out their fraudulent scheme.”
Frey’s office has no comment on the allegation, Rose said.
The prosecution’s list says Frey could testify about the city’s “Outside Employment Policy” and ethics regulations. Frey is not charged in the case and prosecutors have not levied any allegations against him in court or legal documents.
Prosecutors say that Abdi Salah did not tell the city about income he received from allegedly participating in the fraud.
The prosecution’s witness list also includes former Feeding Our Future employees and other defendants who have pleaded guilty to their roles in the fraud.
