Trial I · US v. Farah

Vol XXV

2024-05-29

Day Overview

Wednesday May 29, 2024 was the first and only defense presentation day for defendant Mukhtar Shariff. All other six defendants (Abdiaziz Farah, Mohamed Ismail, Abdimajid Nur, Said Farah, Abdiwahab Aftin, and Hayat Nur) formally rested without presenting any defense. Shariff's team called eight witnesses: University of Minnesota expert Dr. Paul Vaaler (diaspora/remittance economics), land-use attorney Jacob Steen (Afrique zoning history), Zawadi Center owner Yusuf Ali (current occupant of Afrique site), Sysco sales consultant Derek Czapiewski (food purchases for Afrique), community members Khalid Omar and Abdirahman Kariye (eyewitnesses to food distribution at Dar Al-Farooq), Amina Adan and Abdikadir Haji (recipients of food at Dar Al-Farooq), and finally defendant Mukhtar Shariff himself began his direct examination (continuing to the next volume). The most significant moment was Jacob Steen's cross-examination revealing that Shariff never disclosed his involvement in the Federal Child Nutrition Program to his own land-use attorney, even while simultaneously building a $900,000+ event center allegedly funded by that program. Defense counsel must study the government's effective use of Steen to deliver the pitch-deck implication without introducing it directly, and the Czapiewski cross that showed January 2021 meal counts were submitted before Sysco's first delivery.

Government Strategy

Vol XXV is entirely a defense day. Six of the seven non-Shariff defendants rested without presenting any witnesses — only Mukhtar Shariff's team put on a case. The government's strategy on cross was to neutralize each defense witness by establishing the limitations of their knowledge: (1) they forced Dr. Vaaler to concede he reviewed no case evidence and his research did not address millions of dollars in transactions; (2) through Jacob Steen they planted the inference that Shariff concealed the food program from his own attorney and used federal child nutrition funds to build a for-profit event center; (3) through the Dar Al-Farooq witnesses they established that food distribution was observed only on Saturdays — one day per week — undercutting claims of daily mega-counts; and (4) through Czapiewski they showed that Sysco's first delivery was February 11, 2021, yet meal counts for January 2021 had already been submitted, suggesting pre-Sysco meals were falsely claimed. The government also used Czapiewski's cross to introduce evidence of checks flowing from multiple other shell-site entities to Afrique, suggesting Afrique was a food supply hub for a broader fraudulent network.

Strategic Notes for Defense Counsel

- The Saturday-only distribution problem is the most urgent factual issue to resolve before trial. Four defense eyewitnesses (Omar, Kariye, Adan, Haji) consistently described food being available on Saturdays; two of the most credible (Adan and Haji who were present every day) never saw it on any other day. If the program claimed daily reimbursements, the defense must explain this discrepancy — either through the structure of the program (weekly pickup serving multiple children at once under pandemic non-congregate waiver), through the actual claim forms (which may have been structured as weekly totals rather than daily counts), or by investigating whether there were additional unreported distribution days. This is the government's strongest evidentiary point from this volume. - The January 2021 gap (meal counts submitted before Sysco delivery began February 11, 2021) is unaddressed by prior defense and will be exploited at closing. Defense counsel needs to investigate what food source was used in January 2021 — was there a different supplier, or were these false claims? If false, this is a critical weakness in any trial of a defendant who used the Dar Al-Farooq site in January 2021. - Jacob Steen's testimony that Shariff never disclosed the food program to his own attorney — and that Shariff never mentioned the pitch book showing the food program as a funding stream for Afrique — is the most damaging single moment of this volume. If Shariff testifies in defense counsel's case, he needs a credible, specific explanation for this compartmentalization. The best framing: land-use counsel handles land use; food program compliance was handled by different advisors. This needs to be specific and documented. - The hub-and-spoke fraud evidence (checks from ThinkTechAct, Empire Cuisine, St. Cloud Somali Athletic Club, Active Mind's Youth, Inspiring Youth, Star Distribution, United Youth to Afrique) introduced through Czapiewski's cross is devastating for the network fraud theory. Defense counsel needs to be prepared to address each of these check relationships if his client is connected to Afrique or any of these entities — either through legitimate explanation (food resale at cost, cooperative purchasing arrangement) or by attacking the checks' foundation. - Dr. Vaaler's core insight — that Somali/East African business culture operates through informal oral agreements, collective community investment, and trust-based relationships rather than western documentation — is genuinely relevant and should be retained for defense counsel's defense if his client faces similar charges. However, the expert must (a) review actual case evidence, (b) be able to testify about how these practices apply at scale (not just $300/month remittances), and (c) be prepared to directly address the government's argument that informality is not a defense to fraud. A better-prepared Vaaler would have been the strongest defense witness of the day.

Witnesses

Dr. Paul M. Vaaler

University of Minnesota professor at Carlson School of Management and Law School, specializing in diaspora business practices, remittances, and East African/Somali migrant economic culture; retained by defense for defendant Mukhtar Shariff.

Expert Defense

Direct Examination

Defense called Dr. Vaaler to provide cultural and economic context for the jury about Somali/East African diaspora business practices, including transactional informality, hawala-based money transfer, informal oral business arrangements, and the tendency to do business through trust-based relationships rather than written contracts. Vaaler testified extensively about remittances (money sent to family abroad), the role of the informal economy for refugee communities, and how these practices can appear irregular or suspicious to western law enforcement without being unlawful.

▸

Transactional informality — the preference to conduct business through oral trust-based agreements rather than written contracts — is a characteristic of East African/Somali business culture; arrangements that look informal are not inherently illegal. — Defense theory: Shariff's business arrangements, even if unusual by western standards, reflect cultural norms rather than fraudulent intent. [p. 5796-5830]

▸

Hawala is a trust-based informal money transfer network widely used in the East African diaspora; money can move through these networks without formal bank records, which often creates law enforcement suspicion even when transactions are lawful. — Explains why unusual money flows in this case may reflect cultural business practices rather than money laundering. [p. 5820]

▸

Remittances — small financial transfers from diaspora members to family abroad — are a lifeline for developing communities; they can also fund microbusinesses and investment, not just household consumption. — Contextualizes money sent overseas by defendants as potentially legitimate diaspora economic activity. [p. 5789-5792]

▸

Dr. Vaaler testified that Minnesota's Somali diaspora (approximately 30,000 people in the Twin Cities) has the largest concentration in the U.S. and that many members are low-income service workers (Uber drivers, hotel staff, food service) with large families averaging 7+ children. — Supports the plausibility of large numbers of children needing food assistance at community sites. [p. 5797]

▸

Dr. Vaaler described how migrants may fear or distrust government institutions based on home-country experiences, leading to reluctance to engage with official regulatory channels. — Provides alternative explanation for compliance failures or informal program administration that the government characterizes as fraud. [p. 5793-5796]

Cross-Examination

Government cross was effective and methodical. Thompson established that Vaaler reviewed no case evidence whatsoever — not the meal counts, not the LLCs, not the money transfers, not the indictment in detail — and has no opinion on whether the defendants are guilty. Thompson then systematically walked Vaaler through each major pillar of his testimony and had him concede that his research described small $200-$300 monthly remittances and household microbusinesses, which Thompson contrasted with the millions of dollars in transactions at issue. Cross was devastating in limiting the utility of Vaaler's testimony to the jury.

▸

Vaaler confirmed he reviewed 'no evidence' in the case and has 'no informed opinion' on whether the defendants committed fraud or money laundering. — Severely undercut the practical value of his testimony to the jury; the government successfully reframed him as academic irrelevant to the facts. [p. 5843-5845]

▸

Thompson established that Vaaler's remittance research described $200-$300 monthly household transfers, not millions of dollars; Vaaler agreed that 'sending millions of dollars to build an apartment building in Kenya wouldn't qualify as a microbusiness.' — Government successfully argued that Vaaler's academic framework does not fit the scale of alleged conduct in this case. [p. 5846-5849]

▸

Thompson elicited that even if transactions are done informally through hawala, if the funds are proceeds of a crime, the transfer is still illegal — and Vaaler agreed. — Neutralizes the entire cultural informality defense as applied to the specific money laundering charges. [p. 5855-5856]

▸

Vaaler agreed that transactional informality is a trust-based system where money sent abroad can still be considered 'your' money held by a relative, with an expectation of reciprocal benefit. — Government attempted to use this to support its theory that money sent overseas was still controlled by the defendants. [p. 5853-5854]

Vulnerabilities The most serious vulnerability is that Vaaler had not reviewed any case evidence. This is a fundamental problem for an expert witness — the jury knew he had no connection to the actual facts. On redirect, Mohring rehabilitated him somewhat by establishing that transactional informality extends beyond money transfers to all business dealings. However, the government's core attack — that his remittance/microbusiness framework describes $200/month transfers, not millions — was largely unanswered. For defense counsel's use: if deploying a similar expert, the expert must be prepared to engage with the actual transaction scale and explain why the cultural framework still applies at larger dollar amounts. A better-prepared expert would have reviewed at least the Afrique financial records and offered an opinion connecting the cultural practices to specific facts in evidence.

For Defense Counsel A more effectively deployed version of this expert would (1) have reviewed actual transaction records, (2) specifically addressed how diaspora communities organize collective investment into large-scale projects (not just microbusinesses), (3) addressed the specific hawala-style collective funding of the Afrique center, and (4) been prepared to address the $900,000+ figure directly. The expert's value was real but poorly maximized. For a future defense, consider having the expert opine specifically on whether the Afrique Hospitality Group investment structure is consistent with diaspora collective investment models.

Jacob Steen

Land-use attorney at Larkin Hoffman law firm in Bloomington; represented Afrique Hospitality Group on its zoning and permitting process from approximately February 2021 to August 2022.

Other Defense

Direct Examination

Defense called Steen to establish that Afrique Hospitality Group was a legitimate, serious business project — not a sham. Steen described a 16-month engagement in which Shariff was fully engaged, deeply involved in every detail, and successfully navigated a complex zoning code text amendment to create a new 'cultural campus' land use category. The project was real, had a legitimate architectural firm, and ultimately became the operating Zawadi Center.

▸

Afrique Hospitality Group successfully amended Bloomington's zoning code to create a new 'cultural campus' category — a 16-month process involving public hearings before the planning commission and city council — and obtained a conditional use permit. — Strongly corroborates that Afrique was a genuine, complex, government-approved project, not a cover or shell. [p. 5873-5879]

▸

The facility at 1701 American Boulevard now operates as Zawadi Center — a real, functioning business with a coffee shop, restaurant, event center, kids' playground, and office space. — Refutes any government claim that Afrique was never intended to be a real business. [p. 5880]

▸

Steen's primary contact at Afrique was Mukhtar Shariff, who was 'involved with every detail' and treated the project as his full-time job; Mahad Ibrahim also participated intermittently as CFO. — Shows Shariff's genuine commitment to a legitimate enterprise; also connects Mahad Ibrahim to the Afrique project. [p. 5881]

▸

Federal Child Nutrition Program income 'was never a part of the presentation' to the city council, and was not discussed as an income stream for the Afrique project. — Double-edged: intended to show the food program was incidental, but the government used this on cross to argue Shariff deliberately concealed the program from his own attorney. [p. 5878-5879]

Cross-Examination

Government's cross was among the most effective of the day. Thompson established the critical facts: Shariff never told his own land-use attorney about his involvement in the Federal Child Nutrition Program, never disclosed that he was claiming to feed 3,500 children every Saturday, and never mentioned that over $900,000 from the program funded the center. Steen testified that he first learned of the program from news stories after the indictment. The court ordered attorney-client privilege waived as to the defunct corporation, allowing full disclosure.

▸

Steen testified: '[Mukhtar Shariff] never talked about [the Federal Child Nutrition Program]. No idea.' He never disclosed that he was running a food distribution site or claiming to feed 3,500 children every Saturday. — Devastating: if Afrique's legitimate purpose was a cultural center and the food program was a legitimate community operation, why was it kept secret from his own attorney? This strongly supports consciousness of guilt. [p. 5887-5889]

▸

Thompson elicited that Steen had never seen 'a pitch deck, a proposal for the Afrique project, that stated that the Federal Child Nutrition Program would help fund these other entities.' Steen confirmed: 'I've never seen that.' — Government signaled to the jury the damaging pitch book (previously admitted through other witnesses) without re-introducing it; implied Shariff hid the pitch book's contents from his lawyer. [p. 5891]

▸

Steen's understanding was that Afrique's primary investors were 'three women who were business leaders in the East African business community' contributing approximately $800,000; the project cost more than that. — Opens question of where the remaining money came from — the government argues it came from the food program. [p. 5886]

▸

Steen confirmed that none of the income streams discussed in the zoning process (restaurants, event center, playground fees, coworking) were federal food program funds; all were for-profit commercial activities. — Government used this to argue the food program money was never intended as a legitimate operational revenue stream but was diverted fraudulently. [p. 5890-5892]

Vulnerabilities Steen was a well-intentioned defense witness whose testimony backfired. The critical error is that defense called a witness who, under cross, became the government's most effective vehicle for arguing consciousness of guilt. The attorney-client privilege ruling (defunct company loses privilege) is a legal issue that prior counsel either did not anticipate or could not avoid. The better strategy would have been to brief the privilege issue more aggressively before trial, or not call Steen at all and rely on documentary evidence of Afrique's legitimacy without opening the 'did Shariff disclose the food program' door. The testimony also inadvertently highlighted the $900,000 funding gap at the Afrique project.

For Defense Counsel For Defense Counsel: the Steen testimony establishes that Afrique was a genuine, city-approved, operating enterprise — the Zawadi Center exists today. This is important to neutralize any government argument that Afrique was entirely fictional. However, the concealment angle needs to be addressed directly: if Shariff testifies, he needs a credible explanation for why he did not mention the food program to his land-use attorney. The best frame: Steen's scope was limited to zoning and land use — Shariff had separate lawyers and advisors for the food program operations, just as any business owner separates legal matters by domain.

Yusuf Ali

Owner of Zawadi Center (formerly Afrique Hospitality Group site at 1701 American Boulevard, Bloomington); invested $500,000 to make the center operational after Afrique stalled due to the criminal case.

Other Defense

Direct Examination

Defense called Ali to establish that the Afrique site is a real, operating business community center today. Ali testified that Zawadi Center exists, has all the planned components (coffee shop, restaurant, event center, kids playground, office space), and that he invested $500,000 of his own money in it after Afrique halted operations due to the criminal case. A promotional video of Zawadi was admitted as Exhibit D7-18.

▸

Zawadi Center (formerly Afrique) operates today at 1701 American Boulevard, Bloomington, with a coffee shop, restaurant, event center, kids' playground, and office space — all uses originally envisioned for Afrique. — Demonstrates the Afrique concept was real and commercially viable. [p. 5893-5896]

▸

Ali invested $500,000 of his own money into the center even knowing Shariff was under federal indictment, because he 'believed in the idea' and saw the community needed it. — Third-party investor confidence suggests the business concept had genuine merit. [p. 5898]

Cross-Examination

Government's cross was brief but effective. Walcker established that Ali had no knowledge of the food program, never saw the financial records, and did not know that more than $900,000 from the Child Nutrition Program allegedly funded the center. She also drew out that Ali told defense counsel the renaming was partly due to negative publicity from the federal charges, then backed away from that on the stand.

▸

Ali did not know that 'more than $900,000 for the center alone came from Child Nutrition Program funds.' — Establishes Ali's investment was made without full information; undercuts the 'community believed in it' narrative by showing the community did not know the funding source. [p. 5898]

▸

Government elicited that Ali told defense counsel the reason Afrique was renamed to Zawadi was because of 'the negative publicity associated with the federal charges in this case' — then Ali partially walked this back on the stand. — Impeachment on prior inconsistent statement; also supports inference that Afrique brand was tainted by the fraud allegations. [p. 5899]

Vulnerabilities Ali is a sympathetic witness — a genuine investor who believed in the project — but he is effectively a community character witness for the Afrique concept, not for Shariff specifically. The government's $900,000 question was sharp and unanswered. Ali also created a small inconsistency problem on the name-change testimony.

For Defense Counsel Ali is useful for defense counsel to establish that the Afrique/Zawadi concept was commercially viable and attracted serious investment. His $500,000 commitment even after indictment is strong evidence the project had real value. However, Defense counsel should ensure any similar witness understands the funding source question before taking the stand, so they are not blindsided by it.

Derek Czapiewski

Sales consultant at Sysco (international food distribution company), responsible for the greater Minneapolis territory; managed the Afrique Hospitality Group account from approximately February 2021 through early 2022.

Other Defense

Direct Examination

Defense called Czapiewski to establish that Afrique Hospitality Group purchased real food from Sysco in substantial quantities — totaling approximately $1,593,158.67 — for use in the Federal Child Nutrition Program. He walked through Sysco invoices (D7-23) and a Descending Dollar Report (D7-24), explaining Sysco's documentation practices and confirming deliveries of wholesale food items (milk, cheese, muffins, grains, produce, protein) to Afrique's multiple delivery locations.

▸

Afrique Hospitality Group was one of the largest Federal Child Nutrition Program customers Czapiewski had ever handled, with total purchases of approximately $1,593,158.67 across multiple delivery locations in Bloomington, Minneapolis, Owatonna, and elsewhere. — Establishes real, substantial food purchases corroborating that the program had a genuine operational component. [p. 5921-5922]

▸

Czapiewski's primary contact at Afrique was Mahad Ibrahim, who handled ordering; Mukhtar Shariff was involved only in account setup and was not the person directing day-to-day food orders. — Reduces Shariff's operational role in the food program; Ibrahim appears to have been the operational manager. [p. 5910, 5930]

▸

Sysco's first delivery to Afrique was February 11, 2021; deliveries continued through late 2021/early 2022, weekly or more frequently. — Establishes a documented real food supply chain during the claimed program period. [p. 5914-5915]

▸

Afrique had other food vendors besides Sysco: Omar Tuna, US Halal Foods, Costco, Afro Produce, Sam's Club — explaining why Sysco invoices alone do not capture all food purchased. — Corroborates that Afrique was running a genuine food operation with culturally specific ingredients Sysco could not supply. [p. 5940]

Cross-Examination

Government's cross was highly effective. Thompson elicited that meal counts for January 2021 had already been submitted before Sysco's first delivery (February 11, 2021), meaning January meals could not have been served using Sysco food. Thompson then showed Czapiewski a series of checks flowing from other entities to Afrique (ThinkTechAct, Empire Cuisine, St. Cloud Somali Athletic Club, Active Mind's Youth, Inspiring Youth and Outreach, Star Distribution, United Youth of Minneapolis) — totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars — establishing that Afrique was receiving food-purchase payments from multiple program sites Czapiewski knew nothing about. This strongly suggested Afrique was a food supply hub for a broader fraud network.

▸

Government Exhibit C-361 shows meal counts of 2,000 per day submitted for January 2021 at Dar Al-Farooq; Sysco's first delivery to Afrique was February 11, 2021 — those January meals could not have been supplied by Sysco. — Direct evidence of false meal claims for January 2021 — food could not have been served if no food supplier had yet been established. [p. 5925-5926]

▸

Government showed checks from ThinkTechAct ($89,990 for CACFP food), Empire Cuisine ($185,000 for food service), St. Cloud Somali Athletic Club ($175,000 for supplies), Active Mind's Youth ($44,000), Inspiring Youth and Outreach ($84,000), Star Distribution ($98,000), and United Youth of Minneapolis ($49,000) — all paid to Afrique Hospitality Group. Czapiewski was unaware of any of these relationships. — Establishes Afrique as a possible food supply or money-flow hub for multiple alleged fraud sites; the network of payments strongly implies coordinated fraud. [p. 5931-5937]

▸

Active Mind's Youth claimed to serve 2,020 children per day; Inspiring Youth and Outreach claimed 1,500+ children per day; United Youth of Minneapolis claimed 2,600+ children per day — yet Mahad Ibrahim's conversations with Czapiewski never mentioned any of these sites or their claimed volumes. — Implies that Afrique's food purchasing did not correspond to the combined claimed serving volumes of all the entities paying it — suggesting the claimed meal counts were inflated. [p. 5934-5937]

Vulnerabilities Czapiewski became a vehicle for the government's hub-and-spoke fraud theory. The January 2021 discrepancy is a serious vulnerability that prior defense counsel did not neutralize — they needed to either explain what food was used for January or attack the government's meal count records. The multiple checks from other entities were devastating; defense redirect did not effectively address them, only noting Czapiewski did not know what the checks were for. For Defense Counsel: if Czapiewski or similar Sysco witnesses appear, develop a clear line of questioning establishing whether the food volume purchased is consistent with the total claimed serving numbers, and be ready to explain the pre-Sysco period.

For Defense Counsel The total Sysco purchases ($1.59M) are substantial proof of real food purchasing. However, the defense needed to contextualize the January 2021 gap — what food was sourced before Sysco came on board? Were there other suppliers in January 2021? This is a factual gap that prior counsel left open. Defense counsel should investigate the pre-February 2021 food sourcing for the Dar Al-Farooq site.

Khalid Omar

Executive Director of Dar Al-Farooq Islamic Center (since August 2022); in 2021, a community member and Bloomington Public Schools equity specialist; witnessed food distribution at Dar Al-Farooq on Saturdays in 2021.

Other Defense

Direct Examination

Defense called Omar as an eyewitness to real food distribution at Dar Al-Farooq on Saturdays in 2021, with lines of cars circling the parking lot. He also testified that he drafted an email to Bloomington Schools official Dinna Wade-Ardley stating the program 'routinely serve[s] up to 3,000 children through this partnership.' He identified Mukhtar Shariff as affiliated with the food distribution operation.

▸

Omar testified: 'I saw food being delivered to real people and at two different locations' — Dar Al-Farooq and Oak Grove Middle School. He personally observed weekly lines of cars on Saturdays for months. — Direct eyewitness corroboration that real food was distributed at the Dar Al-Farooq site. [p. 5953-5954]

▸

Omar sent an email to Dinna Wade-Ardley (Bloomington Schools) stating the partnership 'routinely serve[s] up to 3,000 children' — Omar testified this was done at Mukhtar Shariff's request, after Wade-Ardley asked him to help draft it. — Existence of the '3,000 children' email corroborates the program's claimed scale; however, the conflicted origin story (both Shariff and Wade-Ardley asked him to draft it) creates credibility questions. [p. 5960, 5967-5968]

▸

Government Exhibit G-336 shows Wade-Ardley replied to the email: 'I am not sure 3,000 is the correct number. Maybe 1,000 each week.' — Wade-Ardley's own contemporaneous doubt about the 3,000 figure undercuts the claimed meal count at the Dar Al-Farooq site; she appears to have been a skeptic. [p. 5969-5970]

Cross-Examination

Government cross, conducted by Jacobs, was effective in three ways: (1) established Omar had no formal role in the food program and was not counting attendees; (2) created an inconsistency in Omar's account of who asked him to draft the 3,000-children email (first he said Wade-Ardley, then admitted Shariff asked him first); (3) used the email chain to show Wade-Ardley herself doubted the 3,000-children figure.

▸

Omar initially testified Wade-Ardley asked him to draft the email, then admitted on further cross that Mukhtar Shariff asked him to approach Wade-Ardley and ask if she could send the email. — Inconsistency undermines Omar's credibility; also shows Shariff was orchestrating a document intended to inflate the apparent scale of the program. [p. 5967-5968]

▸

Dinna Wade-Ardley replied to the email: 'I am not sure 3,000 is the correct number. Maybe 1,000 each week.' — A contemporaneous internal check on the claimed numbers from an independent Bloomington Schools official; strongly undermines the defense's suggestion that 3,000+ children per week is credible. [p. 5969]

Vulnerabilities Omar's story about who asked him to draft the email changed during cross-examination, which the government correctly exploited as a credibility issue. The Wade-Ardley reply email ('maybe 1,000 each week') is very damaging because it comes from a neutral third party contemporaneous with the program. For Defense Counsel: consider whether to call Wade-Ardley as a defense witness to explain the full context of the email exchange, or investigate whether the '1,000 each week' figure was for Oak Grove only (and Dar Al-Farooq was separate). On redirect, defense attempted this contextualization but did not fully close the gap.

For Defense Counsel Omar's eyewitness testimony to real food lines and real food distribution is genuinely helpful and should be retained. However, the email origin story needs to be tightened. For a future defense: get Omar's story straight in preparation, and either have a clear answer for the Shariff-asked-me issue or don't elicit the email at all. The Wade-Ardley '1,000 children' email is a vulnerability — Defense counsel needs to understand what specific site she was referring to.

Abdirahman Kariye

Imam of Dar Al-Farooq Islamic Center in Bloomington since June 2021; previously a community leader in Seattle; personal longtime friend of Mukhtar Shariff.

Other Defense

Direct Examination

Imam Kariye testified as an eyewitness to weekly food distribution at Dar Al-Farooq from June 2021 through December 2021. He described lines of cars circling the mosque parking lot to receive grocery bags from 'Mukhtar's team,' which he witnessed on days he was present (described as 'most days' and specifically including Saturdays, Fridays, and weekdays). He vouched for the reasonableness of the claimed attendance numbers (3,000-3,500 per day across two sites) based on what he observed.

▸

Imam Kariye: 'Whenever I was there on the weekends and weekdays that I came for prayer, I did see the food being distributed... I saw it from June up until probably December, consistently.' — An imam's eyewitness testimony to consistent, months-long distribution is highly credible to a jury. [p. 5983-5984]

▸

Kariye testified that on a typical day at Dar Al-Farooq, the mosque receives 'more than 1,000, 2,000 people' — and that during COVID food insecurity was a 'major concern' for the low-income community. — Corroborates the plausibility of large numbers being served at a mosque with 2,000+ regular attendees. [p. 5988]

▸

When shown Government Exhibit N-24 (claimed average daily attendance: 3,500+ for the combined Dar Al-Farooq/Oak Grove sites), Kariye said the numbers 'seem reasonable' based on what he witnessed. — Imam's endorsement of the reasonableness of the claimed numbers is significant character/eyewitness evidence for the defense. [p. 5987-5988]

Cross-Examination

Government's cross by Jacobs was brief but established key limiting points: Kariye was not involved in the food program, had no official role, never counted attendees, did not supervise the operation, and was a personal friend of Shariff (traveled internationally with him to Egypt, Spain, France, Amsterdam, Cabo). The government also pointed out that Kariye described seeing food every day he was present, including Saturdays, Fridays, and weekdays — but claims at issue were only for certain days.

▸

Kariye and Shariff were longtime personal friends since age 18 in Seattle, had traveled together internationally to Egypt, Spain, France, Amsterdam, and Cabo, Mexico. — Establishes potential bias; jury may discount his testimony as that of a loyal friend rather than an objective observer. [p. 5989-5991]

▸

When asked if he saw 3,500 meals being distributed on Mondays and Wednesdays, Kariye said: 'If you told me 3500 people were served, based on the number of the cars I was seeing in and out of the center, I would believe it.' — He did not actually count; his belief is based on general impressions. The government will argue this is speculation, not evidence. Also: he described seeing food on weekdays as well as Saturdays — but other witnesses (Adan, Haji) saw it only on Saturdays, creating a conflict. [p. 5994-5995]

Vulnerabilities The friendship bias is real and will be argued by the government. More problematic is the inconsistency with Adan and Haji: Kariye says food was distributed many days of the week, while Adan and Haji (who were also there consistently) say they only saw it on Saturdays. This internal defense inconsistency undermines the credibility of the broader defense narrative. For Defense Counsel: either reconcile this inconsistency before trial or carefully manage whether to call multiple eyewitnesses whose accounts may diverge on the frequency of distribution.

For Defense Counsel Kariye is a credible, articulate witness whose personal standing as an imam lends weight to the defense. For Defense Counsel, the most valuable element is his testimony about the size of the mosque community (2,000+ Friday attendees), the severe food insecurity during COVID, and the consistency of the distribution operation. However, Defense counsel needs to prepare for the friendship-bias attack and the day-of-week inconsistency.

Amina Adan

Dar Al-Farooq community member, mother of four daughters, early childhood education professional; personally received food from the distribution program at Dar Al-Farooq on Saturdays in 2021.

Other Defense

Direct Examination

Adan testified as a food recipient: she drove to Dar Al-Farooq on Saturdays, waited in lines that were sometimes three blocks long, and received four bags of food (one per child) per week. She described the food as snacks, grains, fruits, and dairy. She testified the food helped her family and she received it many times in 2021.

▸

Adan described lines of cars three blocks long on Saturdays; she received four bags of food per visit (one per child) with enough food for a week per child. — First-person recipient testimony to a large, organized, real distribution operation at Dar Al-Farooq. [p. 5999-6002]

▸

Someone with a clipboard was taking household information (number of kids, number of adults) when food was given out. — Suggests some form of tracking occurred; could be used to argue records should have been kept. [p. 5999]

Cross-Examination

Government cross by Ebert was brief: established that Adan only ever witnessed food distribution on Saturdays (never any other day), she was not counting attendees or taking names, and she knew nothing about the financial operations, the claimed meal counts, or the reimbursement process.

▸

Adan testified she only witnessed food distribution on Saturdays; she never saw it on any other day of the week. — Creates a conflict with Imam Kariye (who said he saw distribution on many days), suggesting the food program may have only operated on Saturdays — which would undermine daily meal count claims. [p. 6003-6005]

Vulnerabilities Adan is a genuinely helpful witness as a food recipient — the government cannot easily call her a liar. However, her testimony is limited to Saturdays, which creates an inconsistency with the daily meal count claims for the site. For Defense Counsel: use Adan for the 'food was real' purpose, but address the daily vs. Saturday distribution issue proactively.

For Defense Counsel Adan's testimony establishes that the food was real, distributed to real people in need, and organized. The three-blocks-long car lines and one bag per child per week testimony is highly humanizing. For Defense Counsel, she is a sympathetic witness for any jury. However, her Saturday-only observation needs to be addressed in context of whatever days the program was claimed to operate.

Abdikadir Haji

Dean of Students at Success Academy (co-located with Dar Al-Farooq Islamic Center); longtime Dar Al-Farooq mosque member; volunteer who opens mosque doors on weekends; personally received food from the distribution program.

Other Defense

Direct Examination

Haji testified he was present at the mosque every Saturday because he volunteers to open the doors for weekend Islamic school; he witnessed a large truck distributing food from the Dar Al-Farooq parking lot every Saturday for months. He personally received food and his family benefited. He identified Mukhtar Shariff as 'one of the head' of the distribution operation.

▸

Haji: 'Every Saturday there's a truck coming in front of the Dar Al-Farooq, and people there have benefitted, include me... and my family.' — Another first-person recipient/eyewitness confirming real food distribution at Dar Al-Farooq on Saturdays. [p. 6023-6024]

▸

Haji was at the mosque every day in 2021 (prayers five times a day) and every weekend as a volunteer — and he only ever saw the food truck on Saturdays. — Consistent with Adan's testimony; reinforces the Saturday-only distribution pattern and challenges daily meal count claims. [p. 6025]

Cross-Examination

Ebert established that Haji, despite being at the mosque every single day in 2021, only ever saw the food truck on Saturdays — and never on any other day. This directly contradicts daily meal count submissions for the site.

▸

Haji was at Dar Al-Farooq every day in 2021 and confirmed: the food truck only came on Saturdays. He never saw it on any other day of the week. — Extremely damaging to the government's claim of daily meal service at this site; provides defense support for the argument that claims were submitted for days when no food was served. [p. 6025]

Vulnerabilities Haji's Saturday-only testimony actually helps the defense on the 'food was real' point but inadvertently helps the government's fraud theory by establishing that distribution only occurred one day per week, not daily as the program claimed. For Defense Counsel: this witness is a double-edged sword. He proves real food was distributed but also supports the government's argument that the program claimed reimbursement for days on which no food was served.

For Defense Counsel Haji's testimony, combined with Adan's, powerfully corroborates that real food was distributed at Dar Al-Farooq on Saturdays. However, the Saturday-only limitation is a problem. Defense counsel should investigate what the actual program claim submissions said about days of operation at this site — if the program was structured as a once-weekly pickup model (consistent with pandemic non-congregate waiver allowing weekly bag pickup), the Saturday-only distribution could be fully compliant.

Mukhtar Mohamed Shariff

Defendant; CEO of Afrique Hospitality Group; former software engineer at Microsoft and Slalom Consulting; founder of SNABPI (Somalia North American Business Professionals Inc.) and Wadani Consulting; Somali refugee who grew up in Lynn/Boston, Lewiston Maine, and Seattle.

Defense Defense

Direct Examination

Shariff began his direct examination at the end of the day (starting p. 6029, cutting off at 6064 with volume ending). His testimony covered his personal background: born in Somalia, came to US as a refugee at age 5, grew up in Boston/Maine, moved to Seattle, attended multiple colleges, studied Arabic in Cairo during the Arab Spring, worked at Microsoft as a software engineer, then at Slalom Consulting (serving Amazon, Starbucks, T-Mobile, Liberty Mutual). He established legitimate consulting work through Wadani Consulting — including work for the Federal Government of Somalia — beginning in 2018, years before the pandemic or the food program. Direct examination of the food program itself had not yet begun by end of volume.

▸

Shariff testified Wadani Consulting was established approximately 2018 and had legitimate clients including the Embassy of the Federal Republic of Somalia in Washington, D.C. (website redesign, virtual commencement speech for the Prime Minister, multiple invoices from 2019-2020); he introduced four exhibits (D7-200, D7-201, D7-202, D7-203) showing this pre-pandemic consulting work. — Directly refutes the government's theory that Wadani Consulting was a shell company created to receive food program money; demonstrates a legitimate pre-existing business. [p. 6054-6063]

▸

Shariff confirmed he made a knowing, voluntary, intelligent waiver of his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent before taking the stand. — Procedural: properly on the record. His decision to testify is significant — the defense believes his personal account is necessary. [p. 6026-6028]

▸

Shariff described an extensive entrepreneurial history: eBay sales at age 15, logistics company with his brother (2013-2017, acquired trucks, OTR contracts), cell phone business, restaurant (Salama Restaurant), Microsoft/Slalom engineering career — establishing a pattern of legitimate business activity across many years. — Humanizes defendant and supports the narrative that his involvement in the Afrique project and food program was consistent with a legitimate entrepreneurial mindset, not a fraud scheme. [p. 6051-6053]

▸

Shariff explained that Somali birth dates are often registered as January 1 because birth dates were not celebrated culturally — a detail that normalizes a pattern the government may have used to suggest false identities. — Directly addresses a potential government argument about document irregularities. [p. 6030]

Cross-Examination

Cross-examination had not begun by the end of this volume. Continues in Vol XXVI.

Vulnerabilities Shariff's decision to testify is the highest-risk strategic move in the case. The government's cross will focus on: (1) his concealment of the food program from attorney Jacob Steen; (2) the pitch book/investor materials showing the food program as a revenue stream for Afrique; (3) the $900,000+ flowing through his entities; (4) the Kara Lomen 'turn off the errors' text message and Shariff's relationship with PIN; (5) his relationship with Mahad Ibrahim and the January 2021 meal count submission before Sysco deliveries began. Watch Vol XXVI closely.

For Defense Counsel Shariff's direct is structured well to establish him as a credible, articulate, educated man with a long legitimate work history. The Wadani Consulting exhibit strategy is smart — it preempts the shell company argument. For Defense Counsel: Shariff's testimony about the food program itself (not yet in this volume) is the critical piece. He needs to explain (1) what the actual food program operations looked like, (2) why the meal counts are defensible, (3) why he did not tell Steen about the program, and (4) his relationship to the money flows.

Key Evidence

Type	Exhibit	Description	Page	Challenge Opportunity
Document	D7-008	Site plan and floor plan for the Afrique Hospitality Group facility at 1701 American Boulevard, Bloomington — a multi-page architectural document showing proposed uses including play space, restaurant, cafe, meeting/coworking space, event hall, assembly area, and library.	[p. 5869]	The document shows a legitimate business concept but does not address how it was funded. The government's implicit argument — via Jacob Steen cross — is that federal child nutrition funds were used to build a for-profit event center, which is precisely what makes the facility evidence double-edged.
Document	D7-18	Video recording of the Zawadi Center (formerly Afrique site at 1701 American Boulevard, Bloomington), showing the operating multi-use community center.	[p. 5896]	Government can argue this shows the project was completed using fraudulently obtained funds, not that the concept was innocent.
Document	D7-23	192 pages of Sysco invoices for deliveries to Afrique Hospitality Group accounts (multiple delivery addresses), spanning February 2021 through approximately early 2022; showing delivery dates, quantities, product descriptions, unit prices, driver signatures, and customer signatures.	[p. 5911-5916]	Government used the February 11, 2021 first-delivery date to show that January 2021 meal counts could not have been served with Sysco food. Also, the multiple delivery addresses and cross-entity payments suggest food was resold or redistributed among affiliated entities.
Data/Summary	D7-24	Sysco Descending Dollar Report showing all purchases by Afrique Hospitality Group accounts from February 2021 through early 2022; total purchases approximately $1,593,158.67 across four Afrique delivery accounts.	[p. 5917-5921]	Government used this report to identify the first delivery dates for each account and cross-reference against meal count submission dates, finding gaps. Czapiewski could not speak to what entities ultimately used the food.
Document	Gov. Ex. C-361	Meal count file recovered during search of Feeding Our Future; shows 2,000 meals per day claimed for January 2021 at Dar Al-Farooq (or a related site).	[p. 5925]	Defense must identify what food source was used in January 2021, or challenge whether this meal count pertains specifically to the Afrique/ThinkTechAct submission or a different sponsor. Defense did not address this gap on redirect.
Financial Record	Gov. Ex. O-20 (multiple pages)	Multiple checks from various entities to Afrique Hospitality Group: ThinkTechAct Foundation ($89,990 for CACFP food), Empire Cuisine & Market ($185,000 for food service), St. Cloud Somali Athletic Club ($175,000 for supplies), Active Mind's Youth ($44,000 for food expense), Inspiring Youth and Outreach ($84,000), Star Distribution ($98,000), United Youth of Minneapolis ($49,000).	[p. 5931-5937]	The checks could reflect legitimate food resale or distribution arrangements; defense needs an alternative explanation for each payment. The fact that Czapiewski did not know about any of these entities is damaging because it suggests the food Sysco sold to Afrique was being redistributed in ways that bypassed normal procurement channels.
Document	Gov. Ex. G-336	Email chain: Khalid Omar to Dinna Wade-Ardley (Bloomington Schools) stating 'we routinely serve up to 3,000 children through this partnership'; Wade-Ardley's reply: 'I am not sure 3,000 is the correct number. Maybe 1,000 each week.'	[p. 5960, 5969-5970]	Wade-Ardley's 'maybe 1,000 each week' could refer only to the Oak Grove Middle School site, not Dar Al-Farooq; defense redirect attempted this but did not close it. If Wade-Ardley testifies (she may have previously in this trial), her full context for the '1,000' number is essential.
Document	D7-200, D7-201, D7-202, D7-203	Wadani Consulting invoices and emails to the Federal Embassy of Somalia (2019-2020) for website redesign, appointment booking system, and a virtual commencement speech by Somalia's Prime Minister for the SNABPI professional diaspora organization.	[p. 6055-6063]	These documents only cover 2019-2020; the government will argue this does not explain how Wadani Consulting was used in 2021 in connection with the food program. The amounts are also relatively modest compared to the food program revenues.
Document	Gov. Ex. N-24	Government summary chart showing average daily attendance (claimed meals) for Dar Al-Farooq Islamic Center/ThinkTechAct: ranging from 2,000/day (Jan 2021) to 3,500/day (Feb-Sep 2021).	[p. 5961, 5986-5988]	The chart aggregates two sites (Dar Al-Farooq and Oak Grove); Adan and Haji testified distribution was Saturdays only, which is inconsistent with 'daily' claimed averages on the chart. Defense failed to address this structural inconsistency.

Legal Rulings & Objections

⚖

Court ruled that attorney-client privilege was waived — and alternatively that a defunct corporation retains no privilege — permitting Jacob Steen (former attorney for Afrique Hospitality Group) to testify fully, including about communications with Mukhtar Shariff regarding project funding. Court relied on SEC v. Carrillo (S.D.N.Y. 2015, unpublished) and noted the Fourth Circuit has characterized this as an unsettled question with the weight of authority holding that a dissolved corporation retains no privilege. — Critical ruling: the government was able to elicit from Shariff's own former lawyer that Shariff never disclosed the food program or the pitch deck. If privilege had been maintained, this entire line would have been blocked. For Defense Counsel: this ruling may be appellate issue if the case results in conviction and the evidence from Steen is important to the verdict. Also, for defense counsel's case, ensure any Afrique-related attorney communications are carefully assessed for privilege before calling any former counsel as a witness. [p. 5838-5842]

⚖

Court sustained objection to government's question to Yusuf Ali: 'Is it okay in Somali culture to lie, steal or cheat?' Court ruled the question was beyond scope. — Appropriate ruling. The government was attempting to use Ali to neutralize the Dr. Vaaler cultural expert testimony. The court's ruling prevented this particular line, though the government achieved similar effect on cross of Vaaler directly. [p. 5901]

⚖

Court agreed to take the attorney-client privilege issue question-by-question during Steen's testimony, ultimately resolving in favor of full disclosure after receiving Shariff's in-court waiver and conducting legal research during the mid-morning break. — The court's flexible approach (research during recess, then rule) suggests Judge Brasel is willing to resolve novel privilege issues quickly at trial rather than requiring advance briefing. For Defense Counsel: privilege issues involving defense-side witnesses should be briefed pre-trial. [p. 5774-5842]

⚖

Court overruled defense objection to Thompson's question to Vaaler about whether money laundering was illegal, stating 'Overruled. The answer will stand' and allowing Vaaler to confirm that sending proceeds of fraud abroad would be illegal. — Court allowed the government to extract a concession from the defense's own expert that the cultural informality defense does not shelter illegal money transfers. Preserved for potential appeal on scope of expert testimony. [p. 5856]

Prior Defense Performance

Prior defense counsel (Goetz, Mohring, Falk for Shariff) showed significant strategic creativity in assembling a multi-witness defense covering expert context, legitimate business evidence, and eyewitness corroboration. However, several significant errors stand out: (1) Calling Jacob Steen was a serious miscalculation — defense counsel apparently did not anticipate how effectively the government would use Steen to establish that Shariff concealed the food program from his own attorney. The attorney-client privilege issue should have been resolved before trial, either by not calling Steen or by proactively addressing the concealment issue. (2) Dr. Vaaler was poorly deployed — an academic expert who had reviewed no case evidence and had no opinion on guilt is essentially useless on the facts; defense needed either a more engaged expert or no expert at all. (3) The food distribution witnesses (Adan, Haji, Omar, Kariye) inconsistently described distribution as Saturdays-only, which creates a significant problem given daily meal count claims; prior counsel did not reconcile this inconsistency before putting witnesses on the stand. (4) The government's 'January 2021 meal counts before Sysco delivery' point was not addressed on redirect of Czapiewski — this is a significant evidentiary gap that prior defense left open. Positives: The Wadani Consulting pre-pandemic documents (D7-200 through D7-203) are a smart preemptive move; the Dar Al-Farooq eyewitnesses are generally credible and helpful; and Shariff's biographical background direct examination (refugee history, Microsoft career, legitimate entrepreneurship) is well-constructed.