An activist focused on police accountability is facing serious allegations of misappropriating charitable donations. Prosecutors claim that Brandon Anderson, who leads a nonprofit organization called Raheem AI, used over $75,000 meant for the nonprofit for his personal expenses, allegedly funding lavish vacations and shopping sprees.
According to the Office of the Attorney General for the District of Columbia, Anderson’s spending included more than $40,000 on luxury vacation rentals and nearly $10,000 on personal travel to places like Cancun. He reportedly also spent significant amounts on designer clothing and veterinary services.
Attorney General Brian Schwalb expressed strong disapproval of Anderson’s actions, stating, “Brandon Anderson misused charitable donations to fund lavish vacations and shopping sprees.” He added that the board overseeing Raheem AI failed to prevent this misuse. The attorney general’s office is now taking legal action against Anderson, emphasizing the need to hold accountable those who exploit charitable intentions for personal gain.
Raheem AI was established in 2017 to provide a platform for individuals to voice complaints about police conduct. However, it has recently shifted focus toward proposing alternative responses to emergencies without involving law enforcement. This change has raised eyebrows, especially in light of the current lawsuit.
Anderson has been accused of not only misusing funds but also of failing to compensate an employee for work done, as well as forcing this employee to sign an illegal noncompete agreement. The alleged financial misconduct violates various laws governing nonprofit organizations, particularly concerning wage payments and fair governance.
The lawsuit seeks to dissolve Raheem AI and recover the misused funds, direct them to legitimate charitable causes, and permanently ban Anderson from leading any nonprofit within the district. It also demands compensation for the affected employee.
Anderson has publicly denied the allegations, arguing that the funds were used appropriately. The case highlights ongoing concerns about accountability within nonprofit organizations and the importance of transparency in charitable activities.
