Sacto 9-1-1
August 10, 2010
Federal prosecutors reject claims of illegal searches by Salyer defense

FrederickScottSalyer.jpgBy Denny Walsh and Sam Stanton
dwalsh@sacbee.com

Federal prosecutors today flatly rejected claims that the FBI conducted illegal searches during its years-long probe of tomato magnate Frederick Scott Salyer, saying that the reams of documents provided by an informant had been obtained legally.

In a filing made in U.S. District Court this morning, prosecutors ridiculed the notion presented by Salyer's defense attorneys that evidence against him was stolen and that Salyer's company handbook prohibits the release of internal information.

Salyer, facing the prospect of life in prison if convicted of racketeering, bribery and other charges, is the former head of SK Foods LP and was caught up in the federal probe with the considerable help one of his own vice presidents, Anthony Ray Manuel, who provided a mountain of company paper to the FBI prior to the execution of any search warrants.

Salyer's attorneys claim the case is fatally flawed because Manuel sought out inside information from company computers and files and turned it over to an FBI agent without any court-authorized warrants being obtained.

But the government said everything Manuel obtained was a document he had access to in the normal course of performing his job, and that case law makes it clear that he had the right to turn it over to investigators.

"This is not a trade secrets case," prosecutors wrote. "The defendant's claims that the Manuel documents were 'proprietary information, not to be copied and given to third parties absent court process' is irrelevant.

"He cannot incorporate the SK Foods employee handbook into the United States Constitution."

The filing is the latest in a continuing war of words between lawyers for the 54-year-old multimillionaire and federal prosecutors who say he rigged tomato prices and sold old and moldy products in one of the biggest fraud scandals in the history of the American food industry.

Salyer is in custody in the Sacramento County Jail and his attorney, Malcolm Segal, has mounted a fierce campaign to win his release on bail and to convince U.S. District Judge Lawrence K. Karlton that much of the government's case is built on information Manuel unlawfully handed over to an FBI agent.

Manuel, who was in charge of national sales for Salyer's company, secretly worked for the FBI for 18 months, sometimes wearing a wire, and delivered a bale of company records, including his own emails, to the agent.

Manuel became an informant in August 2006, after the FBI approached him while investigating an unrelated crime. In return for his help, he was allowed to defer a guilty plea and work off his prison time while still being paid $200,000 a year by Salyer, court documents filed by Segal state.

The defense says Manuel's help was provided illegally, and has portrayed the FBI case agent as heading a rogue operation to ensnare Salyer.

But federal prosecutors have defended the FBI's methods and said in today's filing that Manuel's position inside Salyer's company gave him access to a wide array of documents he had every right to copy and deliver to the agent.

"It appears to the Government that every Manuel document is one that Manuel had access to as part of his job," prosecutors wrote, adding that all of the emails he turned over came directly from his own inbox inside the company computer system.

They added that the FBI agent "admonished Manuel not to access information not otherwise available to him in the usual performance of his duties as a vice president of SK Foods."

The matter is set to be argued before Karlton at a hearing on Sept. 8. Meanwhile, Salyer's defense attorneys are continuing their efforts to win his release on bail, saying his health is suffering and that he cannot mount a defense while locked away.

The government contends he is almost sure to flee the country if released.

Call The Bee's Denny Walsh, (916) 321-1189.

About Comments

Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.

What You Should Know About Comments on Sacbee.com

Sacbee.com is happy to provide a forum for reader interaction, discussion, feedback and reaction to our stories. However, we reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments or ban users who can't play nice. (See our full terms of service here.)

Here are some rules of the road:

• Keep your comments civil. Don't insult one another or the subjects of our articles. If you think a comment violates our guidelines click the "report abuse" button to notify the moderators. Responding to the comment will only encourage bad behavior.

• Don't use profanities, vulgarities or hate speech. This is a general interest news site. Sometimes, there are children present. Don't say anything in a way you wouldn't want your own child to hear.

• Do not attack other users; focus your comments on issues, not individuals.

• Stay on topic. Only post comments relevant to the article at hand. If you want to discuss an issue with a specific user, click on his profile name and send him a direct message.

• Do not copy and paste outside material into the comment box.

• Don't repeat the same comment over and over. We heard you the first time.

• Do not use the commenting system for advertising. That's spam and it isn't allowed.

• Don't use all capital letters. That's akin to yelling and not appreciated by the audience.

You should also know that The Sacramento Bee does not screen comments before they are posted. You are more likely to see inappropriate comments before our staff does, so we ask that you click the "report abuse" button to submit those comments for moderator review. You also may notify us via email at feedback@sacbee.com. Note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us the profile name of the user who made the comment. Remember, comment moderation is subjective. You may find some material objectionable that we won't and vice versa.

If you submit a comment, the user name of your account will appear along with it. Users cannot remove their own comments once they have submitted them, but you may ask our staff to retract one of your comments by sending an email to feedback@sacbee.com. Again, make sure you note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us your profile name.

hide comments
blog comments powered by Disqus


About Sacto 9-1-1

Sacto 9-1-1 is a blog on crime and emergency services news in the Sacramento region.

Send feedback on Sacto 9-1-1 to Assistant Metro Editor Anthony Sorci at asorci@sacbee.com

Subscribe to Breaking News Alerts

FOLLOW US | Get more from sacbee.com | Follow us on Twitter | Become a fan on Facebook | Get news in your inbox | View our mobile versions | e-edition: Print edition online | What our bloggers are saying

Sacto 9-1-1 Q&A

Bee reporters answer questions about area crime news, trends and other issues. QUESTION: What happened in court to Michael Gomes, who was one of the men accused of the Mariposa County gem heist? Submitted by: Elizabeth, Auburn ANSWER: Michael Anthony Gomes, 43, was arrested in January at his Citrus Heights (Read More)

More Questions and Answers
See all the crime Q&As
Submit your question

May 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

Monthly Archives


Kim Minugh on Twitter

Follow "Kim_Minugh" on Twitter

Local Agencies on Twitter

Categories