Feeding Our Fraud: Fake board, real food

Lead prosecutor Joe Thompson completed his cross-examination of Aimee Bock yesterday morning. His cross-examination was something of a master class in the art. Bock came across as a practiced liar — “practiced in the art of deception,” to quote the Rolling Stones song. It’s hard to tell, but in my judgment Thompson’s art exceeded Bock’s. I think the jury saw through her blatant lies and formulaic responses. Thompson’s cross made her lies transparent.

Of all the fraudsters she enriched, Bock must have enriched herself the least. However, Thompson spent time patiently establishing that she had financially benefited herself and her boyfriend with the funds she controlled as executive director of Feeding Our Future. She siphoned Feeding Our Future money to her boyfriend, the improbably named Empress Watson — Empress Watson, Jr. that is. Empress is he son of a boy named Empress.

Bock not only put him on the Feeding Our Future payroll, she paid his Handy Helpers shell company some $900,000 for alleged work rebuilding Feeding Our Future’s office. Feeding Our Future funds seem to have funded two Vegas vacations they took on which Empress rented luxury cars at $2,000 a day. Bock would not even conceded that she enjoyed the ride. She testified that she got carsick riding in them — that she forced him to pull over and let her vomit outside one of the Lamborghinis he rented in Vegas. Gag me with a Lamborghini ride. Need I add that their relationship did not end well?

Thompson essentially concluded his cross-examination with a focus on Bock’s fake board of directors. If Bock’s nonprofit had a real board she would never have gotten away with the self-dealing that Thompson established. Her fake directors made it possible for Bock to rule Feeding Our Future like an empress, so to speak.

We met Bock’s fake directors during the government’s case — alleged president Ben Stabyberg, alleged secretary John Senkler, and alleged treasurer Jamie Phelps. Each of these gentlemen radiated a self-deprecating blue-collar charisma. If this trial were televised, they would have become cable television news stars — a point I made to KARE 11 reporter Lou Raguse over lunch. Lou mentioned that he had caught up with Jamie Phelps outside the courthouse the day he testified (his related story is posted here).

Another crazy day of testimony in the Feeding our Future case. Eagan mechanic Jamie Phelps had no idea Aimee Bock made him treasurer of Feeding our Future “volunteering” about 5 hours a week. More to come on @kare11 pic.twitter.com/e1wZ94VZ9H

— Lou Raguse (@LouRaguse) February 26, 2025

Stayberg and Phelps are bartenders. Phelps is a mechanic for the City of Eagan — he keeps their lawnmowers in working order. They all testified to their lack of qualifications to serve on a nonprofit board and their lack of knowledge that they were (allegedly) on the Feeding Our Future board. The board held no meetings. Bock’s board minutes were fake. She never communicated by email with any of them. She never sent them any documents to review.

Interrogated by Thompson about all this, Bock might have given an inch. The board held no “formal” meetings. Her minutes documented “informal conversations.” However, Bock would not concede that she signed Stayberg’s name to the minutes. Stayberg certainly didn’t. Whodunnit? That mystery will survive this trial.

On IRS filings Bock asserted that her board members devoted five hours a week to their work for the organization. She testified that she had been taught to make this representation through her service on other boards. Did the board members ever see the organization’s financial statements? “That I don’t recall.” I can answer that question. The true answer is “no.”

After a brief redirect examination by Ken Udoibok and a brief recross by Thompson, we broke for lunch. Udoibok rested Bock’s case with the conclusion of her testimony.

Bock co-defendant Salim Said intends to testify and put on his first witness after protracted proceedings regarding the witness — Mohamed Liban. Thompson wanted Liban to have the benefit of counsel regarding his possible exposure before he testified and knowingly to waive his Fifth Amendment right not to testify. Over the lunch break, counsel was obtained. After a colloquy with his attorney and with Judge Brasel, Liban waived his right (through a Somali interpreter) and took the stand.

Liban was presented as an influential Somali social media influencer. He took brief videos of food preparation at Safari restaurant and other “sites” from which the Safari group benefited through their participation in the child federal nutrition program. Safari may have been the first adopter of the business model that permeates overall case against the 70 defendants charged.

Attorneys Mike Colich and Adrian Montez represent Said. Montez conducted Liban’s direct examination and exhibited some 20 brief video clips of food being prepared at Safari and the sites. One or two videos depicted cars lined up and allegedly waiting for the distribution of free meals outside Safari. Another video showed the street and the alley packed with snow outside the restaurant. Traffic was nonexistent. I don’t remember the purpose of that video. It seemed to belie the proposition that Safari was distributing thousands of free meals a day from April 2020 through January 2022, when the investigation of this case “went overt.”

Liban testified that he posted the video clips on social media (Snapchat) as advertisements for the sites. Several of the clips showed aluminum meal trays stacked seven high, five trays across a table, seven deep on food preparation tables at Safari. Each tray included enough feed for five meals. Montez superimposed a calculator over the video to tabulate 1,225 meals.

Liban took and posted videos of each of the Safari group sites in St. Paul, St. Cloud, Willmar, Rochester, and Mankato. At times, Liban testified, the crowd inside Safari “looked like the Vikings stadium,” although the biggest crowd he ever saw at Safari amounted to 100-200 people at the restaurant’s event center.

Thompson’s cross reduced the value of Liban’s testimony to a number asymptotically approaching zero. He made the point that not a single video depicted a child eating at Safari or a Safari site. Liban raised privacy concerns. Referring to Safari’s alleged 12,000 free meals a day — 6,000 breakfasts, 6,000 lunches — Thompson had Liban concede he couldn’t vouch for the accuracy. Thompson would have to ask management about that. He’s not testifying the numbers are correct. I’m sure Thompson looks forward to asking management about the numbers when Said testifies on Monday.

Thompson questioned Liban about his awareness of the enrichment of the Safari partners through the free meal program. Did he know they paid $2.7 million for a Park Avenue mansion they converted into office space? “You’re the first I’m hearing this from,” he said.

Thompson then demonstrated Liban’s own enrichment via the Safari gang. On their advice in March 2021 he set up a shell company (Shimbirka LLC) for payment on the videos. He deposited a steady stream of checks deriving from the Safari group work over the period March 2021 to January 2022, when the FBI effectively terminated the Feeding Our Future fraud though raids around the Twin Cities. In his 9-month career as a social media influencer, Liban racked up $200,000.

Safari and the related sites constituted Liban’s only clients. Thompson hazarded the thought that the videos were taken as proof against the day that arrived with the Feeding Our Future indictments.

When the Feeding Our Future fraud came to an end, so did Liban’s career in advertising as a social media influencer. Shimbirka’s bank account was overdrawn and closed by the bank. Today he makes his living driving for Uber.

When Thompson asked Liban about the overdrawn and closed Shimbirka account, Liban began his answer (through the translator) “In America…” I thought he intended to declare that in American anyone could get back on his feet. However, that’s not what he had in mind. Rather, he asserted, “In America accounts get overdrawn all the time.”

Montez did not ask a single question when offered the chance to examine Liban further on redirect. I think — I’m guessing — he regretted calling Liban as a witness.