Motion to Detain Defendant Pending Trial — No. 0:21-cr-00169 (Dkt. 17, D. Minn.)

Summary

A Motion to Detain Defendant Pending Trial, Doc. 17 filed January 6, 2022 in the District of Minnesota (Case 0:21-cr-00169-ECT-JFD, Criminal No. 21-169), United States v. Harold Bennie Kaeding, signed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Jordan L. Sing for Acting U.S. Attorney Charles J. Kovats, Jr. The government says the defendant used his wife's and son's identities to apply for COVID-relief loans, is indicted for at least $2,182,625 in 12 applications, and received over $650,000 in proceeds. After learning of the investigation he fled to Colombia on a second passport, resisted returning and refused to give up his passport, and agents had earlier found over $90,000 in cash and an ID in another name. It argues his risk of nonappearance outweighs his claimed medical conditions and asks for detention pending trial.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

        CASE 0:21-cr-00169-ECT-JFD Doc. 17 Filed 01/06/22 Page 1 of 8



                      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                         DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
                       Criminal No. 21-169 (ECT/HB)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                    Plaintiff,

       v.                                MOTION TO DETAIN DEFENDANT
                                         PENDING TRIAL
HAROLD BENNIE KAEDING,

                    Defendant.

      Defendant Harold Bennie Kaeding’s risk of nonappearance is apparent from

his own actions. Kaeding used his wife and son’s identities to fraudulently apply for

over $2 million in COVID-relief loans, received over $650,000 in fraud proceeds, and

then—after learning of the government’s investigation—fled to Colombia (using a

second passport) to avoid accountability. Kaeding then resisted numerous overtures

to voluntarily return to the United States, which required the government to seek his

involuntary removal from Colombia. Kaeding’s intransigence persisted even after

Colombian officials located him. Instead of cooperating, Kaeding refused to open his

apartment door and strung authorities along long enough to flee to another location.

Colombian authorities finally located Kaeding at a local clinic, at which time he

exaggerated his claimed medical conditions and refused to tender his passport to

facilitate his removal. The government moves for his detention pending trial.

                                 BACKGROUND

      Kaeding is indicted for applying for at least $2,182,625 in COVID-relief loans

via 12 separate applications under knowingly false and fraudulent pretenses. (Dkt.

1.) Every application included knowingly false representations, including fabricated
        CASE 0:21-cr-00169-ECT-JFD Doc. 17 Filed 01/06/22 Page 2 of 8



supporting records, bogus business information, and blatant misstatements about the

use of the proceeds. Also, instead of using his own name, Kaeding submitted these

fraudulent applications using the personal identifying information of his family. This

had the unfortunate consequence of ensnaring them in this investigation. Because

the Indictment fully details the mechanics of Kaeding’s fraud scheme, the

government will instead focus on how Kaeding’s actions highlight his clear risk of

nonappearance.

      In mid-January 2021, the government seized over $220,000 from numerous

bank accounts related to Kaeding’s fraud scheme. The government simultaneously

executed a search warrant at Kaeding’s residence and located over $90,000 in cash

alongside various ATM withdrawal receipts from bank accounts tethered to the fraud

scheme. 1 The government also seized Kaeding’s passport along with a Minnesota ID

Card bearing Kaeding’s picture but issued in the name of Benjamin Michael Strand.

Kaeding also possessed a Social Security Card in the name of Benjamin Michael

Strand. See Gov’t Ex. 1. Kaeding voluntarily spoke with law enforcement and

admitted that he—and not his family members—submitted the suspect COVID-relief

loans. The parties entered resolution discussions and Kaeding requested a plea offer.

However, on April 23, 2021, Kaeding changed his mind and declined a pre-indictment

resolution.




1      The government also seized a $34,000 vehicle purchased with fraud proceeds
and traced another $80,000 in payments against Kaeding’s residence. This leaves an
additional $231,000 in unaccounted-for fraud proceeds.
                                          2
            CASE 0:21-cr-00169-ECT-JFD Doc. 17 Filed 01/06/22 Page 3 of 8



        On May 1, 2021, just eight days after rejecting the plea offer, Kaeding fled the

United States for Colombia. This travel is how the government learned that Kaeding

apparently possessed two valid U.S. passports—one in the name Harold Kaeding and

another in the name Benjamin Kaeding.           The only known connection between

Kaeding and Colombia is through his wife, who emigrated from Colombia and

maintained an apartment there to visit family. The government is unaware of any

previous time when Kaeding traveled alone to Colombia.            Regardless, Kaeding

cancelled his return flight, repeatedly misled his family about his intention to return

home, and ultimately hunkered down in Colombia.

                On August 4, 2021, a grand jury returned a sealed indictment against

Kaeding for his fraud scheme. The government contacted Kaeding’s lawyer (at that

time) to discuss his whereabouts and encourage his voluntary return to the United

States. 2     The government clearly indicated that Kaeding’s refusal to return

voluntarily could lead to deportation or extradition—a reality that would require

considerable resources and could lead to lengthy detentions for Kaeding while

facilitating his return. Kaeding responded that he would not return unless the

government agreed to a litany of nonsensical demands. The government responded

that Kaeding had until late-September to return voluntarily or face deportation or

extradition. Kaeding opted to remain in Colombia.

       As promised, the government began a months-long process to marshal

considerable resources—both stateside and abroad—to locate Kaeding and facilitate



2    If disputed, the government can produce e-mail communications with
Kaeding’s former attorney.
                                           3
        CASE 0:21-cr-00169-ECT-JFD Doc. 17 Filed 01/06/22 Page 4 of 8



his removal. On November 1, an attorney hired by Kaeding from New York contacted

the government “to assist Mr. Kaeding concerning his criminal matters and potential

extradition/deportation.” The New York attorney expressed hope that “we can work

together to resolve this matter as quickly and simply as possible.” The government

immediately reiterated its hope that Kaeding voluntarily return to the United States:

“The government has repeatedly advised [Mr. Kaeding] that it is time to voluntarily

return to the United States. Mr. Kaeding has missed deadlines to do so, and the

government will continue to proceed accordingly.” Once again, Kaeding opted to

remain in Colombia.

      On November 5, 2021, Colombian authorities located Kaeding at his wife’s

apartment in Barranquilla, Colombia. Kaeding responded by refusing to open the

apartment door. Authorities returned the next day and Kaeding simply refused to

acknowledge their presence. Instead, an English-speaking Colombian immigration

officer successfully contacted Kaeding via telephone. Kaeding agreed to a November

9 appointment at a local Colombian immigration office. Kaeding then cancelled the

appointment ostensibly because his wife had arrived in Colombia to visit him and

rescheduled for November 11.       The government immediately confirmed that

Kaeding’s wife remained at her residence in Eden Prairie, Minnesota.

      Colombian authorities returned to Kaeding’s apartment early on November 10

armed with a search warrant.       But Kaeding already had fled the apartment.

Kaeding’s wife confirmed the apartment now was empty and explained that he was

renting a bedroom elsewhere, but she did not provide the location.        Colombian

authorities reached out to Kaeding via text message. He responded that he would

                                         4
          CASE 0:21-cr-00169-ECT-JFD Doc. 17 Filed 01/06/22 Page 5 of 8



not meet with Colombian authorities until they had an agreement with his New York

lawyer.

      Later that evening, on November 10, Kaeding checked himself into a local

clinic in Barranquilla complaining of chest pain. Colombian authorities advised that

Kaeding did not have a heart attack and was instead admitted for observation. On

November 11, Kaeding’s New York lawyer contacted the government to relate that

Kaeding “had a heart attack and is in ICU at a local hospital in Barranquilla.

[Kaeding] indicates that he will be admitted to surgery tomorrow to analyze his

arteries.” This was untrue. Instead, Kaeding was treated for high blood pressure

and a skin condition.   Kaeding was released on November 12 to the custody of

Colombian immigration for deportation.

      Once again, Kaeding refused to cooperate. Kaeding refused to provide the

location of his passport to facilitate a smooth deportation. Kaeding also refused to

provide the location of his rented room to permit authorities to determine if his

passport was in that location. Moreover, Kaeding refused to be photographed to

facilitate workarounds to deport him without his passport. Despite his best efforts,

authorities from Colombia and the United States ultimately completed the logistics

of successfully deporting Kaeding from Colombia. Kaeding arrived in Miami on

November 13, made a November 15 appearance in the Southern District of Florida,

and ultimately waived further proceedings until his arrival in the District of

Minnesota.




                                         5
        CASE 0:21-cr-00169-ECT-JFD Doc. 17 Filed 01/06/22 Page 6 of 8



                                     Argument

      Kaeding committed his fraud in the name of others, possessed false IDs, fled

the Country using a secondary passport, refused numerous opportunities to return,

repeatedly evaded Colombian authorities, and then actively refused to cooperate in

his removal. Kaeding’s risk of nonappearance is apparent, and he should be detained

pending trial.

      Pretrial detention based on risk of nonappearance is warranted when the

Court, after a hearing, determines that no condition or combination of conditions will

reasonably assure the defendant’s future appearance. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)-(g). The

government must establish risk of nonappearance by a preponderance of the

evidence.   United States v. Abad, 350 F.3d 793, 797 (8th Cir. 2003).         Risk of

nonappearance alone is sufficient to warrant pretrial detention. United States v.

Sazenski, 806 F.2d 846, 848 (8th Cir. 1986).

      Kaeding’s own actions establish his risk of nonappearance well beyond a

preponderance of the evidence. Kaeding faces serious charges for capitalizing on a

national emergency to execute a multi-million-dollar fraud scheme. Despite the

weight of the evidence against him—including the fruits of the search and seizure

warrants and his own inculpatory statements—Kaeding exploited a preindictment

opportunity to flee the country.    This not only underscores his effort to evade

prosecution but highlights the apparent minimal value Kaeding places on his own

family and community ties in Minnesota. Kaeding not only committed his crimes in

the name of his family members, but he had no issues abandoning them for over half

a year in favor of a foreign country with which he had limited familiarity. Kaeding

                                          6
           CASE 0:21-cr-00169-ECT-JFD Doc. 17 Filed 01/06/22 Page 7 of 8



risk of nonappearance is even more apparent from his decision to ignore numerous

overtures—from the government and his own family—to voluntarily return to the

United States.

      Kaeding only doubled down after Colombian authorities located him.            He

refused to engage, lied about his wife visiting (once again entangling his family in his

legal troubles), and used the delay to flee to yet another undisclosed location. With

his options dwindling, Kaeding checked himself into a local clinic complaining of chest

pain. Kaeding related he’d suffered a heart attack, was admitted to the ICU, and

faced impending surgery. Instead, he was admitted for observation, treated for

routine complaints, and released days later to Colombian authorities. Even then,

Kaeding did all he could to avoid his removal by refusing to provide his passport,

provide his location, or be photographed to facilitate his deportation.

      The government predicts Kaeding will claim his medical issues warrant his

release.    But, once again, Kaeding’s own actions undercut such an assertion.

Kaeding’s medical conditions have never impeded his ability to flee. They did not

prevent him from fleeing the country, alone and unassisted, and providing for himself

in a foreign country for over six months. They did not prohibit him from fleeing his

Colombian apartment—again alone and unassisted—for another undisclosed location

after Colombian authorities located him. Kaeding also appears to exaggerate his

health claims to garner sympathy or avoid consequences. Kaeding’s self-reported

heart attack, ICU admission, and impending surgery were debunked by his release

days later. Kaeding similarly appears to embellish his hearing impairment. Kaeding

had no issues hearing government counsel during a meeting in early 2021, Colombian

                                           7
        CASE 0:21-cr-00169-ECT-JFD Doc. 17 Filed 01/06/22 Page 8 of 8



authorities spoke to Kaeding via phone when he refused to open his apartment door,

and Kaeding responded unprompted to his lawyer during his initial appearance

earlier this week.    Put simply, under the applicable legal analysis, Kaeding’s

purported medical issues would not outweigh the evident risk of his nonappearance.

Moreover, Keading will be eligible to receive medical care and monitoring throughout

his pretrial detention.

                                   Conclusion

      Kaeding actions establish a clear risk of nonappearance. Kaeding committed

his crimes in the names of other people, possessed a fake ID and used a secondary

passport to flee the country, and actively ignored, avoided, and impeded authorities

on numerous occasions. Kaeding has squandered any benefit of the doubt. The

preponderance of the evidence establishes that no condition or combination of

conditions will reasonably assure Kaeding’s appearance as required. He should be

detained pending trial.

Dated: January 6, 2022                       Respectfully Submitted,

                                             CHARLES J. KOVATS, JR.
                                             Acting United States Attorney

                                             /s/ Jordan L. Sing

                                             BY: JORDAN L. SING
                                             Assistant U.S. Attorney




                                         8


File and source

File

17.pdf

Size

163,485 bytes

SHA-256

fc1a00d9da2594257e374b081646e3859f7e27559d9d3f85a58d0964760df685

Our copy

17.pdf

Original

No public link identified.