Home / Trial II / Witnesses / Vol V
Trial II · 22cr223

Vol V

2025-02-13
Source PDF
Day Overview

Volume V covers the final cross-examination, redirect, and recross of FBI Special Agent Jared Kary, followed by direct and cross-examination of Stacy Koppen, the nutrition services director for St. Paul Public Schools. Defense counsel Montez (for Said) used Kary's cross to play previously unintroduced defense pole camera footage (D3-0109, D3-0115, D3-0121, D3-0127) showing Sysco food deliveries and distribution activity at Safari Restaurant on December 10, 13, and 15, 2021, establishing that food was in fact moving through the site — even if Kary could not identify the contents or quantity. Udoibok (for Bock) used recross to try to reframe the December 14, 2021, Norma Lopez email (Ex. A78) as internal workplace grievance rather than evidence that Bock was warned of fraud. The most significant moment of the day was government witness Koppen's direct testimony: she opined that the nearly 3,000 meals/day claimed by ASA Limited from a modest restaurant was operationally impossible, that the records showed unrealistic consistency, and that she was unaware of any such operation in St. Paul. Defense counsel should pay close attention to (1) the Sysco delivery footage that defense introduced — it is the strongest visual evidence of legitimate activity — and (2) Koppen's foundation vulnerabilities: she never visited any site, does not know FOF food sourcing, and her cross was weakly developed.

Government Strategy

The government used this day to close out Special Agent Kary's testimony by rehabilitating the surveillance footage through redirect, re-anchoring the jury on the sheer scale of the claimed meal counts (up to 6,000 meals/day at Safari alone) versus the tiny physical activity visible on camera, and highlighting checks signed by Aimee Bock totaling over $246 million flowing through Feeding Our Future. The government then introduced Stacy Koppen, nutrition services director for St. Paul Public Schools, as an operational expert to testify that the claimed meal volumes — nearly 3,000 meals/day at ASA Limited — were logistically impossible for a modest sit-down restaurant, and that the meal count records showed suspiciously uniform daily numbers inconsistent with real-world food service operations. Koppen also testified that she would have known if any St. Paul area organization was distributing thousands of meals per day to children — and she was not aware of any such organization. The overall narrative built a picture of fraud that was both financially documented (large checks from Bock to Safari/Said) and operationally impossible (no infrastructure to produce the claimed volumes).

Strategic Notes for Defense Counsel

- The Sysco delivery footage (D3-0109, D3-0115, D3-0121, D3-0127) is the most valuable prior defense work product in this volume. defense counsel's team should obtain all unreviewed pole camera footage (Kary admitted he did not review all footage from December 10-14) and scrutinize it for additional distribution activity. File a preservation/Brady letter immediately if not already done. - Koppen is a vulnerable witness whose core opinion — that 3,000 meals/day is impossible from a small restaurant — can be significantly weakened. Her entire comparison relies on St. Paul Public Schools' model, which involves in-building cafeteria service, not bulk community distribution. A properly qualified expert in community/emergency food distribution, pandemic food programs, or Somali community food networks could offer a compelling counter-narrative. - The Lopez email (A78) is strategically important for Bock's defense but was poorly handled in cross. The key strategic move is not to argue that the email is ambiguous — it is — but to argue that Bock's response to the email (an all-office meeting, and ultimately terminating at least one site) shows she took her oversight responsibility seriously when warned. Kary himself admitted the Hamdi-flagged site was 'eventually terminated.' - The money trail for Said ($3.5M in real estate in two weeks from child nutrition funds) is very damaging and defense counsel's team must develop a theory for how that money moved and whether Said's client can be distinguished from that evidence. The Cosmopolitan/Safari/ASA corporate structure and the multiple signatories (Abdulkadir Salah, Abdirahman Ahmed, Abdihakim Ahmed) may offer opportunities to argue that Said was a minor participant in a larger network. - The MDE oversight failure angle is underexplored: MDE received the same CLiCS certifications that Bock signed, attempted to stop payments but was legally blocked, and continued paying until the FBI unsealed search warrants. An argument that the program's own administrative design created conditions for fraud, and that Bock and other defendants reasonably believed the system would catch errors, could be powerful — especially if MDE officials can be shown to have had the same information as Bock but failed to act.

Witnesses
Jared Kary
FBI Special Agent and lead case agent who conducted surveillance and financial analysis of the Feeding Our Future fraud scheme
FBI Government
Direct Examination

Kary's direct examination occurred in prior volumes. In redirect (pages 951-968), the government rehabilitated him after cross, re-emphasizing that the Sysco deliveries were small compared to claimed volumes, that Bock signed all checks and was sole account signatory, and that Bock received internal fraud warnings (Hamdi email April 2021, Norma Lopez email December 2021) but continued signing claims.

▸
Safari claimed 185,903 breakfasts and 185,903 lunches in a single month, equating to approximately 5,996 breakfasts and 5,996 lunches per day (every day of a 31-day month). — Anchors the jury to specific, enormous numbers that the defense must rebut; the government will argue no small restaurant could produce this volume. [p. 961-962]
▸
Salim Said used Federal Child Nutrition Program funds to wire $2.7 million to purchase 2722 Park Avenue mansion on July 15, 2021, and approximately two weeks later spent an additional $750,000 on his personal residence — totaling approximately $3.5 million on real estate in two weeks. — Core money laundering/fraud evidence; directly links program funds to personal enrichment by defendant Said. [p. 958-960]
▸
Aimee Bock was the sole signatory on the Feeding Our Future bank account and signed seven-figure monthly checks to Safari; she was also the 'I' in the sponsoring authority certification on every CLiCS claim. — Establishes Bock's personal criminal liability; she personally certified the accuracy of claims she had been warned were fraudulent. [p. 957-968]
▸
A December 14, 2021, email from Feeding Our Future claims employee Norma Lopez to Bock stated: 'They strongly believe you are doing fraud' and 'you not answering their questions on Monday.' — Direct evidence Bock had actual notice of internal fraud allegations before the January 2022 search warrant; undercuts any good-faith defense. [p. 966-967]
▸
An April 6, 2021, email from employee Hamdi to Bock reported site visit concerns: 'All these sites claim that they have a very high serving volume. During my observation, I didn't see enough movement at that level in the restaurant, and that was a red flag for me.' — Bock had early, specific internal red flags about serving volume fraud as early as April 2021 and still continued certifying claims for months. [p. 964-965]
Cross-Examination

Defense counsel Montez (Said) cross-examined Kary with four defense exhibits of pole camera footage from December 10, 13, and 15, 2021 (D3-0109, D3-0115, D3-0121, D3-0127), showing Sysco food deliveries, individuals carrying trays and bags, and activity on both sides of the Safari Restaurant building. Kary conceded he could not confirm the contents or quantity of boxes/bags, did not document activity from December 10-14 (focusing only from the 15th onward), and that there was activity on both sides of the building. Defense counsel Udoibok (Bock) recrossed on the Norma Lopez email, attempting to reframe it as an internal grievance by unhappy employees rather than a fraud warning.

▸
Kary admitted he did not review all footage from December 10-14 — 'Not every single hour, correct' — and the summary he generated focused on activity from December 15 onward. — Defense can argue the agent cherry-picked the footage most damaging to defendants while ignoring exculpatory activity during earlier days; incomplete investigation argument. [p. 946-947]
▸
Kary confirmed he did not know what was in the boxes, bags, or trays, and could not identify specific Somali dishes (Hooya Chicken, Chicken Suqaar) or their serving portions. — Opens cultural competency/bias argument: the FBI agent lacked knowledge of Somali food culture to properly interpret what he was observing. [p. 936-949]
▸
Kary agreed there was activity on both sides of Safari Restaurant building, and the defense established Sysco made multiple deliveries (at least 5-6 trips of boxes on December 10 alone, plus multiple trips on December 13 and 15). — Directly contradicts the government narrative that no real food was being distributed; Sysco deliveries indicate real food supply was entering the building. [p. 939-945]
▸
Udoibok established that the Norma Lopez email (A78) does not explicitly accuse Bock of fraud — 'They' (unidentified) believe fraud is occurring — and that Lopez appears to be confiding confidentially with Bock as a loyal employee, possibly warning her about disgruntled coworkers. — If the jury accepts that the Lopez email was a workplace loyalty message rather than a fraud warning, it weakens the government's 'actual notice' theory for Bock. [p. 969-997]
▸
Kary testified that MDE 'attempted' to stop payments but 'were unsuccessful' and 'continued to pay' because 'the rules that were in place didn't allow them to stop' — until the FBI's search warrant affidavits were unsealed on January 20, 2022. — Opens argument that MDE's own systems failed and that Bock may have believed MDE oversight would catch any errors; also a potential third-party culpability argument. [p. 993-994]
▸
Kary confirmed Bock was not connected to the Safari or ASA bank accounts beyond depositing reimbursement checks — 'Just the deposits coming in from Feeding Our Future. That's the only connection.' — Useful to limit Bock's direct involvement in how co-defendants spent money once they received checks. [p. 996]
▸
Kary testified that the December meeting Bock held with sites was about: 'getting money for legal fees, selling a binder, and also the discussion of getting in trouble' and that Bock told individuals 'to stop spending and flaunting their money because it's going to be exposed.' — Highly damaging consciousness-of-guilt evidence; can be interpreted as Bock knowing the scheme was fraudulent and coaching participants to avoid detection. However, Kary could not confirm exact words and acknowledged the meeting may have occurred before or after the Lopez email. [p. 978-983]
Vulnerabilities Kary's most significant vulnerability is his incomplete review of surveillance footage: he acknowledged not reviewing all footage from December 10-14, which the defense exploited to show Sysco deliveries and food distribution activity. He admitted his volume estimates were based on 'common sense' from personal grocery shopping experience, not expert analysis — a point the defense could develop more aggressively. He did not know Somali cuisine or portion sizes. His knowledge of the December meeting's content came entirely from witness interviews (hearsay), not direct observation or recording. He admitted uncertainty about who 'they' were in the Lopez email. He conceded MDE's own failure to stop payments. His testimony about the $2.7M mansion purchase and Bock's check-signing is documentary and hard to challenge, but his extrapolation from camera footage to fraud conclusions is vulnerable to expert challenge.
For Defense Counsel Defense counsel should consider (1) retaining a food service logistics expert to counter Kary's common-sense volume arguments with actual data on meal pack volumes; (2) exploiting the incomplete footage review — file a Brady/Giglio motion if any footage not reviewed was potentially exculpatory; (3) challenging the Lopez email interpretation with testimony from Lopez herself or other FOF employees about the internal dynamics; (4) developing the MDE oversight failure angle — if the state agency failed to catch fraud despite having the same records Bock was certifying, Bock's reliance on MDE's silence as validation is a reasonable defense; (5) using the Sysco delivery footage (which the government did not contest) to argue legitimate food supply existed at the site.
Stacy Koppen
Nutrition Services Director for St. Paul Public Schools; called as an operational expert to testify that the claimed meal volumes at ASA Limited were logistically impossible for a small restaurant
Other Government Government
Direct Examination

Koppen testified about the massive infrastructure required to serve large numbers of meals — her district needs 325 employees, a 37,000-sq-ft central kitchen, 17,000 sq ft of refrigeration, 7 refrigerated trucks, forklifts, and advance purchasing planning to serve 28,000 lunches/21,000 breakfasts per day across 60 buildings. She then opined that ASA Limited's claimed 3,000 meals/day from a modest sit-down restaurant was not credible, the meal count records showed unrealistic uniformity (same initials every single day, counts varying by only 3 children over entire weeks), and she was unaware of any St. Paul organization distributing thousands of meals/day to children during COVID.

▸
During the peak COVID demand period, St. Paul Public Schools' highest-volume sites handed out only about 1,000 meal boxes per WEEK (not per day), at just two sites; other sites peaked at 350 boxes per week — and demand dropped off significantly by fall 2020. — Directly contradicts the plausibility of 3,000+ meals/day being distributed by a small restaurant; provides authoritative benchmark from largest school district in the area. [p. 1017-1018]
▸
The meal count records for ASA Limited (Gov. Ex. C37, October 2020) showed the same staff initials every single day of the month — including weekends — and daily counts varying only between 2,995 and 2,998 meals. Koppen testified: 'Even for a normal five-day work period, I have never seen anyone who has had perfect attendance at that level.' She also stated: 'The only thing consistent is the inconsistency.' — Expert opinion that the records themselves bear the hallmarks of fabrication rather than genuine documentation; this opinion is from an operational expert with 325 employees and institutional knowledge. [p. 1022-1026]
▸
Koppen testified that she was not aware of any organization in St. Paul in October 2020 providing 3,000 meals to kids a day, and that she believed she would have been aware of such an operation given her district's network and community relationships. — Negative evidence of scale; if such an operation existed, Koppen would likely have known — her unawareness supports the fraud theory. [p. 1026-1027]
▸
Koppen testified that food program surpluses must go back into the food program — 'That money has to go back into the food program' — and cannot be used to buy cars or travel. — Directly undermines any argument that defendants were entitled to keep excess reimbursement funds as profit. [p. 1051]
Cross-Examination

Udoibok's cross was superficial and did not effectively challenge Koppen's core opinion. He got her to admit she never visited any FOF site, did not know where the sites sourced food, and did not know whether food was delivered or picked up. He introduced D1-882 (St. Paul Public Schools 2020 food service financial report) to suggest per-meal food costs were as low as $0.24, though Koppen disputed the interpretation. Colich's cross for Said was brief and made one effective point: Koppen could not rule out that Somali families might seek Somali food from cultural providers other than St. Paul Public Schools, and she did not know how many Somali citizens lived in the area.

▸
Koppen admitted she never visited any Feeding Our Future site, never visited a FOF office, did not know who FOF sites purchased food from, and did not know whether food was delivered or picked up. — Her opinion is based entirely on inference from meal count records and her own district's operations — she has no direct knowledge of FOF operations, which limits the weight of her testimony. [p. 1037-1038]
▸
Koppen conceded that 'kids still had to get food' and that 'other sites that may have been created' could have provided food during COVID, and that Somali families might seek Somali food from sources other than SPPS. — Opens the door to argue that the defendant sites did fill a genuine community need — particularly for the Somali community — even if the claimed numbers were inflated. [p. 1041-1046]
▸
Defense introduced D1-882 showing the St. Paul Public Schools 2020 food service financial report, suggesting per-meal food costs as low as $0.15-$0.24 for breakfast. Koppen disputed the numbers but could not definitively explain the discrepancy on cross. — If the actual food cost per meal is very low, it undermines arguments about the financial implausibility of the claimed volumes. [p. 1032-1036]
Vulnerabilities Koppen is vulnerable on several fronts: (1) She has zero direct knowledge of any FOF operation — she never visited a site, never reviewed their sourcing, staffing, or actual distribution methods. (2) Her 'I would have known' testimony about awareness of large meal programs in St. Paul is speculative and assumes that informal community networks would reliably reach her. (3) Her comparison to St. Paul Public Schools' own operations involves a fundamentally different model (in-school cafeteria service, 60 large buildings, 325 employees) versus a community distribution model; a properly qualified expert could challenge whether her benchmarks are appropriate comparators. (4) Her attendance point (same initials every day) is observational — she has no knowledge of the specific circumstances at these sites, and there are alternative explanations (e.g., a single dedicated person, or culturally consistent record-keeping practices). (5) She conceded that demand varied significantly across different sites and time periods, which leaves room to argue that a high-demand community site could sustain elevated counts. (6) She is not a forensic accountant or fraud expert — her opinion is operational, not analytical.
For Defense Counsel Defense counsel should consider calling a competing operational expert who has experience with community-based food distribution programs (not school cafeterias), particularly programs serving immigrant/refugee communities. Such an expert could testify that culturally-based food distribution (home-prepared, bulk distribution, community gatherings) operates on different logistics than institutional school food service. Defense counsel should also develop the cross on Koppen's 'I would have known' assertion — it is speculative and unsupported. Consider whether a Somali community leader or food distribution expert could testify about the actual food needs and cultural practices of the Minneapolis/St. Paul Somali community during COVID. Finally, Koppen's per-meal cost data (D1-882) deserves further development — if costs were genuinely low, that actually makes higher volume claims more plausible, not less.
Key Evidence
Type Exhibit Description Page Challenge Opportunity
Surveillance D3-0109 (Defense Exhibit) Pole camera footage from December 10, 2021 at Safari Restaurant showing individuals loading boxes into multiple vehicles (white SUV, dark SUV) and a Sysco delivery truck making deliveries [p. 935] Agent Kary could not confirm contents of boxes; government argued on redirect that the small number of boxes was inconsistent with claims of 6,000 meals/day
Surveillance D3-0115 (Defense Exhibit) Pole camera footage from December 10, 2021 (11:32 a.m.) showing Sysco delivery truck making multiple trips delivering boxes to Safari Restaurant, individuals carrying trays and bags to vehicles [p. 938] Government argued deliveries were 'small' compared to 18-wheeler deliveries needed for 6,000 meals; Kary testified comparison to central kitchen loading docks
Surveillance D3-0121 (Defense Exhibit) Pole camera footage from December 15, 2021 (7:36 a.m.) showing activity at the original camera angle (alley side of Safari), including apparent Sysco deliveries [p. 944] Kary testified the camera was moved to capture more activity where the meal distribution signs were located
Surveillance D3-0127 (Defense Exhibit) Pole camera footage showing activity on the other side of Safari Restaurant building that Kary referenced as the reason the camera was moved [p. 946] Government did not object; however, government argued on redirect that activity visible was still insufficient for claimed meal volumes
Document Gov. Ex. A78 December 14, 2021 email from Norma Lopez (Feeding Our Future claims department) to Aimee Bock stating: 'They strongly believe you are doing fraud and you not answering their questions on Monday' [p. 966-997] Defense argued successfully that 'they' is unidentified, Lopez appears to be a loyal employee confiding concerns about disgruntled coworkers (not accusing Bock), and Lopez urged Bock to have an honest conversation rather than reporting her; Lopez's own motivations are ambiguous and she has a possible familial relationship with Norma Cabadas
Document Gov. Ex. A61 April 6, 2021 email from Feeding Our Future employee Hamdi to Bock reporting site visit concerns about high claiming volume with insufficient activity, and same invoices across multiple sites [p. 964-965, 997] Defense established on recross that the specific site in question (Halal Food Kitchen / US Chamber of Commerce / Care Community Services) was 'eventually terminated' by FOF — showing Bock did take action when concerns were raised
Financial Record Gov. Ex. W2 Feeding Our Future bank signature card showing Aimee Bock as sole account signatory and monthly checks of over $1 million signed by Bock to Safari Restaurant [p. 957-968] Defense argued Bock had no visibility into how recipients spent the money once paid; Kary confirmed Bock was not connected to Safari's bank accounts beyond the deposits
Data/Summary Gov. Ex. V38 / V13 CLiCS data submissions to State of Minnesota for Safari (V38) and ASA Limited (V13) showing 185,903 breakfasts and lunches claimed for a single month at Safari, and 92,898 breakfasts and lunches for ASA; every submission bears Feeding Our Future as the sponsoring authority [p. 961-963, 989-995] Defense noted the claims were 'consistent with the approved meal counts' (not in excess of the allowable allocation) and that Bock certified based on paperwork received from sites — she was relying on what sites reported
Financial Record Gov. Ex. W82 / W27 Bank records showing $2.7 million wire from Salim Said's account to purchase 2722 Park Avenue property (July 15, 2021) and a $750,000 cashier's check for Said's personal residence (July 28, 2021), both sourced from federal child nutrition program funds [p. 958-960, 996] Defense confirmed Bock was not connected to these accounts 'beyond the deposits coming in from Feeding Our Future'; the direct culpability is Said's, not Bock's
Document Gov. Ex. C37 Meal count records for ASA Limited, October 2020, showing approximately 3,000 meals claimed every day of the month, with the same staff initials (AA) every single day including weekends, and daily variation of only 3 meals [p. 1021-1041] Defense cross established: (1) two people certified the count (daily counter and site supervisor); (2) the form is standard for the program; (3) Koppen has no direct knowledge of ASA operations; (4) Udoibok noted the counts were within the approved monthly allocation
Document D1-882 (Defense Exhibit) Minnesota Department of Education 2020 food service financial report for St. Paul Public Schools showing per-meal food costs and total operating revenue of $33.4 million [p. 1032-1037, 1049-1051] Koppen disputed the accuracy/interpretation of the document's per-meal cost figures; government used redirect to show that SPPS's $31+ million in expenses reflects the enormous infrastructure (facilities, labor, trucks, equipment) that the FOF sites lacked
Legal Rulings & Objections
⚖
Defense exhibits D3-0109, D3-0115, D3-0121, and D3-0127 (pole camera footage from multiple dates) admitted without government objection during Kary cross — Defense successfully introduced surveillance footage showing Sysco deliveries and food distribution activity that the government had not presented in its own case; precedent for future defense to use government's own surveillance tools against it [p. 935, 938, 944, 946]
⚖
Government objection to Montez's question 'Enough to feed 6,000 children per day?' on grounds of speculation — OVERRULED; Kary allowed to answer 'Not at all, no' — Court permitted the government to re-elicit Kary's core volume conclusion on redirect; sets tone that lay witness opinion on obvious factual matters is permissible [p. 952]
⚖
Defense objection to government's leading question on Chicken Suqaar ('Is it your understanding that Chicken Suqaar is simply chicken together with rice?') — OVERRULED — Government was permitted to lead on redirect, allowing Kary to confirm the Somali food dish description without independent knowledge [p. 953]
⚖
Udoibok's objection to government's question asking whether Kary did/did not know nature of Lopez-Cabadas relationship, on lack of foundation — OVERRULED; Kary allowed to answer — Court gave wide latitude to explore context of the Lopez email; defense could use the same latitude to explore alternative interpretations of the email [p. 971]
⚖
Court sustained government's objection on 'lack of foundation' when Udoibok asked whether Kary sensed 'bad blood' between Lopez and Cabadas after Kary said he did not know — Court will limit repetitive speculation questions when witness has already indicated lack of knowledge; defense should frame questions as 'if you know' to preserve the record [p. 972]
⚖
Court sustained government objection ('asked and answered, the email speaks for itself') during Udoibok's extended re-reading and re-questioning of the Lopez email — Court grew impatient with the extended email parsing on recross; future defense counsel should be more selective and efficient in challenging documentary evidence [p. 988]
⚖
Defense objection (Udoibok) to Koppen's testimony as 'calls for speculation, relevance, competence' when asked about ASA Limited meal count records — OVERRULED — Court permitted a non-forensic, operational witness (school district food director) to opine on the credibility of meal count records from a program she administers differently; this is significant precedent — government can use operational comparators even without a formal expert designation [p. 1088]
⚖
Mr. Colich raised concern before the court (outside jury presence) about the practice of government counsel calling attention to other defendants entering the courtroom; Thompson acknowledged he would not continue; noted on the record — Jury contamination concern; the prior trial's history (referenced obliquously) was a live concern; future defense counsel should monitor this issue carefully and seek a curative instruction if it recurs [p. 1052-1053]
Prior Defense Performance

Defense counsel Montez (Said) performed effectively on Kary cross, introducing four defense exhibits of surveillance footage that established Sysco deliveries and food distribution activity — creating a visual counter-narrative the government did not fully rebut. His line of questioning about Kary's failure to review all early December footage was surgically effective. However, Montez did not fully develop the potential argument that the FBI's decision to move and reposition the camera — specifically to focus on the side with the meal signs — reflects a motivated investigation that systematically under-documented the alley-side activity. Montez also did not sufficiently challenge Kary on the meaning of 'pick-up' distribution (boxes to cars) as a legitimate model for culturally-appropriate food distribution. Udoibok's recross on the Lopez email was overly long and repetitive — the court sustained multiple objections for being 'asked and answered,' and the jury was likely fatigued by the extended parsing of ambiguous email language. Udoibok's core theory (that Lopez was a loyal employee warning Bock about disgruntled coworkers rather than accusing Bock of fraud) is viable but needed to be made in 3-4 pointed questions, not 25 pages. The recross succeeded in showing Kary was guessing about 'they' but failed to land a definitive alternative interpretation. On Koppen cross, both Udoibok and Colich underperformed significantly. Neither counsel challenged the fundamental methodological flaw: Koppen was comparing a school cafeteria/central kitchen operation to a community-based bulk distribution model — these are operationally distinct. No one questioned her about whether the St. Paul Public Schools benchmark is even applicable. No one asked whether bulk take-out distribution (boxes or trays loaded into cars) has different infrastructure requirements than school cafeteria service. No one challenged the 'I would have known' assertion with specific evidence of other community food programs she was unaware of. Defense exhibit D1-882 was introduced but not effectively used — the low per-meal food cost data could have supported arguments about plausibility of the volumes, but the cross did not connect the dots for the jury.