Feeding Our Future trial: FBI surveillance video does not show 1000s of meals served
FBI installed 12 cameras watching sites claiming to serve thousands of meals to children.
One that watched the former Safari Restaurant showed an average of 40 people per day over six weeks.
Safari's former co-owner, Salim Said, is on trial alongside Feeding Our Future founder Aimee Bock.
MINNEAPOLIS (FOX 9) - In December 2021, the FBI put up 12 surveillance cameras on the Feeding Our Future sites that were claiming the highest number of meals being served to children during the COVID-19 pandemic.
"We were trying to confirm what the investigation was telling us," testified an FBI agent who was on the stand all day on the third day of the trial of Aimee Bock and Salim Said.
"What was the investigation telling you? That it wouldn't be possible to feed this many children."
What we know
Jurors were shown dozens of documents in this third day of the trial of Aimee Bock and Salim Said, alleged co-conspirators in the $250 million dollar federal meal fraud.
Jurors saw meal counts and invoices claiming that Safari served between 4,000 and 6,000 meals a day in 2020 and 2021. Its total claim in that time was 3.9 million meals served and its total take was over $12 million.
But the video told a different story. An average of 40 people per day came and went from Safari, co-owned by Said, during the six weeks it was surveilled.
Occasionally there would be some meal boxes loaded into vehicles, but "definitely not 6,000" the agent testified.
They also showed video from a deli in St. Paul, where Salim Said claimed to serve 1,800 meals per day. The average was 23 people coming and going each day.
The other side
Aimee Bock's defense attorney maintains she knew nothing about the fraud, that she was victim of others lying to her.
He pushed the agent about not surveilling the back entrance to Safari, that it was possible meals were loaded into a delivery truck they could not see.
The agent pushed back, saying 6,000 meals would add congestion regardless if there were trucks involved.
"To that volume, I would say it would not make any sense."
What's next
The jury will continue to be deluged with paperwork, since 270 boxes of documents were seized from the Feeding Our Future office alone.
The prosecution is trying to show that the high meal claims were not just for a few weeks, but for months on end, and that requires a tedious process of showing all these documents to the jury.
They're also seeing dozens of emails, many of them with Aimee Bock's name on them, to prove she was intimately involved in the fraud.
The jury already heard from one woman who pled guilty to operating a fraudulent meal operation in Faribault, who said Aimee Bock knew what was going on. With a long list of guilty pleas, many more of those meal site operators who've already admitted to fraud are still expected to testify.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNN
18 minutes ago
- CNN
DC residents feel less safe after Trump takeover: poll
Roughly 8 in 10 Washington, DC, residents oppose President Donald Trump ordering the federal government to take control of the city's police department as well as his deployment of the National Guard and FBI to patrol the city, a new Washington Post-Schar School poll finds. Notably, more than half of those living in the capital city have noticed the increased federal presence and 61% of those people feel less safe as a result of Trump's action. The figures go against the narrative Trump and other top administration officials have touted about the impact of the federal takeover. 'We went from the most unsafe place anywhere to a place that now people, friends are calling me up, Democrats are calling me up, and they're saying, 'Sir, I want to thank you. My wife and I went out to dinner last night for the first time in four years, and Washington, DC, is safe. And you did that in four days,'' Trump said at the White House on Monday. Overall, a 79% majority of DC residents oppose Trump's order, according to the survey, with just 17% supportive of the decision. Most, 69%, say they're strongly opposed. DC residents say, 65% to 20%, that they don't think Trump's actions will reduce the amount of violent crime in the city. By contrast, majorities say they think increased economic opportunities in poor neighborhoods (77%), stricter national gun laws (70%), an increased number of Metropolitan Police officers patrolling communities (63%) and using outreach workers to resolve disputes (57%) would help to reduce violent crime. Trump, who was supported by just over 6% of DC voters in last year's presidential election, remains broadly unpopular in the District, the poll finds, with his overall job approval rating now standing at just 15% among all residents. The poll also finds a significant shift in DC residents' attitudes toward crime since this spring, perhaps reflecting the changing political context of the question — just 31% now describe crime as an extremely or very serious problem in the District (down from 50%) and a 54% majority say they believe the problem of crime in the city is improving (up from 29%). Among the 35% of residents who say they, a family member, or a close friend has been a victim of crime in the past five years, support for Trump's actions stands at 34%, compared with 8% support among those who do not know a recent crime victim. About half of residents say Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser should be doing more to oppose Trump, with 30% saying she is handling things about right and 12% that she should be more supportive. A 71% majority also say DC police should not help the federal government much or at all to deport undocumented immigrants living in the city. Local police officers have been seen participating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement checkpoints over the past week. Bowser's rating stands at 53%, unchanged from a May survey, with 54% saying that DC police are doing a good or excellent job. The Washington Post-Schar School poll was conducted August 14-17 and surveyed 604 DC residents through a combination of live phone interviews and online surveys. Results for the full sample have a margin of error of +/- 4.1 percentage points.


CNN
19 minutes ago
- CNN
DC residents feel less safe after Trump takeover: poll
Roughly 8 in 10 Washington, DC, residents oppose President Donald Trump ordering the federal government to take control of the city's police department as well as his deployment of the National Guard and FBI to patrol the city, a new Washington Post-Schar School poll finds. Notably, more than half of those living in the capital city have noticed the increased federal presence and 61% of those people feel less safe as a result of Trump's action. The figures go against the narrative Trump and other top administration officials have touted about the impact of the federal takeover. 'We went from the most unsafe place anywhere to a place that now people, friends are calling me up, Democrats are calling me up, and they're saying, 'Sir, I want to thank you. My wife and I went out to dinner last night for the first time in four years, and Washington, DC, is safe. And you did that in four days,'' Trump said at the White House on Monday. Overall, a 79% majority of DC residents oppose Trump's order, according to the survey, with just 17% supportive of the decision. Most, 69%, say they're strongly opposed. DC residents say, 65% to 20%, that they don't think Trump's actions will reduce the amount of violent crime in the city. By contrast, majorities say they think increased economic opportunities in poor neighborhoods (77%), stricter national gun laws (70%), an increased number of Metropolitan Police officers patrolling communities (63%) and using outreach workers to resolve disputes (57%) would help to reduce violent crime. Trump, who was supported by just over 6% of DC voters in last year's presidential election, remains broadly unpopular in the District, the poll finds, with his overall job approval rating now standing at just 15% among all residents. The poll also finds a significant shift in DC residents' attitudes toward crime since this spring, perhaps reflecting the changing political context of the question — just 31% now describe crime as an extremely or very serious problem in the District (down from 50%) and a 54% majority say they believe the problem of crime in the city is improving (up from 29%). Among the 35% of residents who say they, a family member, or a close friend has been a victim of crime in the past five years, support for Trump's actions stands at 34%, compared with 8% support among those who do not know a recent crime victim. About half of residents say Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser should be doing more to oppose Trump, with 30% saying she is handling things about right and 12% that she should be more supportive. A 71% majority also say DC police should not help the federal government much or at all to deport undocumented immigrants living in the city. Local police officers have been seen participating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement checkpoints over the past week. Bowser's rating stands at 53%, unchanged from a May survey, with 54% saying that DC police are doing a good or excellent job. The Washington Post-Schar School poll was conducted August 14-17 and surveyed 604 DC residents through a combination of live phone interviews and online surveys. Results for the full sample have a margin of error of +/- 4.1 percentage points.

Wall Street Journal
an hour ago
- Wall Street Journal
Patel Neglects Due Process at the FBI's Peril
We are deeply concerned by the recent dismissals without explanation of agents and senior managers at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as are the nearly 9,000 former FBI agents we represent ('Patel Advances Trump's Vision for the FBI,' U.S. News, Aug. 9). The bureau must remain an independent law-enforcement agency that is protected from political interference. This principle comes from the oath every agent takes to protect the American people and uphold the Constitution and the rule of law. FBI agents are trained to treat all defendants with due process throughout the investigative process and during any subsequent prosecution.